APHC010130302026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 274 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-19 [3552] Nammi Appala Raju and others ...Appellants Vs. The State of AP and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellants: Mr. Arjampudi Rama Koteswara Rao Advocates for Respondents: G.P. for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Sri B. V. Pavan Kumar representing Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, Standing Counsel for VUDA and MUDA CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 13th March, 2026. P C : The present Writ Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 12.11.2025, passed in W.P. No. 31342 of 2025, whereby the Writ Petition filed by the petitioners/appellants herein was disposed of with liberty to approach the competent court for seeking appropriate relief. 2. The petitioners had challenged the proceedings dated 26.08.2024, issued by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA), by virtue of which the petitioners were informed to seek redressal of their grievance p. 2 HCJ & CGRJ from an appropriate legal forum, as VUDA would not be able to interfere in the matter after the efflux of over three decades and after the release of the mortgage plots and execution of the re-conveyance deed. 3. The claim of the petitioners was that the vacant site admeasuring 675.28 square yards, falling in R.S.No.122/1 of Vadlapudi Village in Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, ought not to have been made a part of the layout in L.P.No.35/1989, as the land in question belongs to the petitioners. 4. The learned Single Judge, however, in the judgment and order impugned, noticed that the petitioners had earlier filed Writ Petition No.27715 of 2016, which was disposed of vide order dated 29.04.2021, with the observation that the petitioners had not availed a proper remedy in the nature of a suit for declaration of title for redelivery of the allegedly wrongfully included land, and that the writ petition was not a proper remedy, and had proceeded to dismiss the writ petition. 5. The learned Single Judge, therefore, proceeded to dispose of the Writ Petition, reiterating the liberty to approach the Civil Court for declaration of title. 6. In our opinion, it was not open to the petitioners to file Writ Petition bearing W.P. No. 31342 of 2025 yet again on a similar cause of action, as it would be hit by the principle of res judicata. We find no illegality in the judgment and order impugned. Accordingly, the present Writ Appeal stands dismissed. p. 3 HCJ & CGRJ No costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this case, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ. CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J. SSN