Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17242 (AP)

K SIDDA REDDY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/4560/2026 · 2026-03-02

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010082352026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD W.P.Nos.4560 & 4563 of 2026 W.P.No.4560 of 2026 Between: 1. K SIDDA REDDY, s/o K. Narayana Reddy Aged about 58 years Residing at D.No.5-87, Plot No.6 Gollapalli Road, Thummalagunta Tirupati-517505, Tirupati District ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, O/o Tirupati District Collector, Tirupati, Tirupati District 3. Tirupati Urban Development Authority, Rep. by its Vice-Chairman Tirupati, Tirupati District. 4. Thummalagunta Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Pudipatla, Tirupati District. 5. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: PAWAN KUMAR MALAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents:Karri kalyan Durga Prasad SC FOR TUDA Counsel for the 2 Respondents:Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats W.P.No.4563 of 2026 Between: 1. D. Damodaram, s/o D. Narasimhulu Naidu Aged about 54 years Residing at D.No.5-87/1, 3rd floor, Gollapalli Road, Thummalagunta Tirupati-517505, Tirupati District ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.522238 2. The District Collector, O/o Tirupati District Collector, Tirupati, Tirupati District.517002 3. Tirupati Urban Development Authority, Rep. by its Vice-Chairman Tirupati, Tirupati District.517501 4. Thummalagunta Gram Panchayat, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Pudipatia, Tirupati District.517505 5. The Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati, Tirupati District.517501. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: PAWAN KUMAR MALAPATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents:GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP Counsel for the Respondents:Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats Counsel for the Respondents:Karri kalyan Durga Prasad SC FOR TUDA 3 The Court made the following ORAL COMMON ORDER: Heard Sri M. Pawan Kumar, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners and Sri K.K. Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for TUDA and Sri B. Ramesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 2. Sri K.K. Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for TUDA and Sri B. Ramesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Chief Planning Officer, TUDA, Tirupati, dated 16.02.2026 in both Writ Petitions. Copies of the Written Instructions are also furnished to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners. The same are taken on record. 3. On perusal of the Written Instructions, at the outset, this Court takes exception with regard to the language that is used while addressing the Writ Petitioners, as if they are encroachers, while the truth is that the Respondent Corporation has required the land belonging to the Writ Petitioners for the purpose of road widening. The road widening can be done by the Respondent Corporation in accordance with law. The Respondent Corporation shall not portray the owners of the land as encroachers. 4. Be that as it may, having considered the facts and circumstances of the cases, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of these Writ Petitions at the admission stage, without going into merits, with a direction to the Respondent Authorities to follow the due process of law for utilization of land belonging to the Writ Petitioners for widening of the road. 5. With these observations and directions, these Writ Petitions stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 03.03.2026 JKS 4 90 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD W.P.Nos.4560 & 4563 of 2026 03.03.2026 JKS