Pynda Subrahmanya Jagannadha Satya Prasad v. The Govt. of AP
WP/15359/2014 · 2026-01-26
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21955 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21955 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010321372014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 15359 OF 2014 Between:
1. PYNDA SUBRAHMANYA JAGANNADHA SATYA PRASAD,, S/O LATE SRI PYNDA SRIRAMAKRISHNA MURTHY, HINDU, BUSINESS, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O D.NO.37-1-20 & 21; MAIN ROAD, KAKINADA. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE GOVT OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF KAKINADA, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. PYNDA RAM KUMAR, S/O LATE SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, HINDU, BUSINESS, AGED 72 YEARS, R/O D.NO.36-8-36; TILAK STREET, KAKINADA. 4. PYNDA VENKATA NAGENDRA SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, S/O PYNDA RAM KUMAR, HINDU, BUSINESS, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 36-8-36; TILAK STREET, KAKINADA.
...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction one in the Nature of the Writ of Mandamus, by Declaring the inaction of the second respondent in not initiating any action against the illegal constructions being made by the 3rd 85 4th respondents in their property bearing D.No.37-1-19, situated in Main Road, Kakinada, East Godavari District, which are endangering and detriment
2
to the petitioner's interests, despite the complaint of the petitioner dt.15-04- 2014, as Illegal, Arbitrary and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to initiate action against the 3rd & 4th respondents and their constructions by demolishing the illegal constructions and grant IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 19025 OF 2014 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim orders directing the 2nd respondent to initiate action against the 3rd 86 4th respondents and their illegal constructions being made in the property bearing D.No.37-1-19, situated at Main Road, Kakinada, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the writ petition, and grant IA NO: 2 OF 2014(WPMP 19026 OF 2014 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Grant Interim Injunction restraining the 3rd & 4th respondents, their men, workers and persons claiming right under them from proceeding with the constructions being made in the property bearing D.No.37-1-19, situated in Main Road, Kakinada, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the writ petition, and grant IA NO: 3 OF 2014(WPMP 21536 OF 2014 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the presence of 2nd respondent/myself IA NO: 7 OF 2014(WPMP 87212 OF 2014 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.
P RAJESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. A MALATHI(S C FOR MUN CORP OF KAKINADA)
2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV
3. T V JAGGI REDDY
3
The Court made the following ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri P. Rajesh Babu, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri T.V.Jaggi Reddy, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and Sri M. Krishna Rao, Ld. Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporations. 2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“In view of the facts stated above it is just and necessary that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction one in the Nature of the Writ of Mandamus, Declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in not initiating any action against the illegal constructions being made by the 3rd & 4th respondents in their property bearing D.No.37-1-19, situated in Main Road, Kakinada, East Godavari District, which are endangering and detriment to the petitioner's interests, despite the complaint of the petitioner dt.15-04-2014, as Illegal, Arbitrary and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to initiate action against the 3rd & 4th respondents and their constructions by demolishing the illegal constructions and grant such other relief or reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”
3. The Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are private parties who have undertaken construction in the subject site. Counter-Affidavit filed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Kakinada (Respondent No.2) dated 25.06.2014, would indicate that the allegations made by the Writ Petitioner are factually incorrect inasmuch as the Writ Petitioner was granted approved plan after complying with all the conditions including a donation of 91.5 Sq. Yards to the Corporation for the purpose of road widening. 4. This Court has sifted through the contents of Para-4 of the Counter- Affidavit, which would indicate that the building which is about 150 years of old and in a dilapidated condition was required to be demolished, and accordingly, it was demolished. The Writ Petitioner has submitted a plan for approval. Though the Writ Petitioner has initially not complied with certain conditions,
4
eventually, the Writ Petitioner has complied with all the conditions and proceeded with the construction. 5. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 would submit that the building has been completed and has obtained Occupancy Certificate long time ago.
Having considered these facts, this Court is of the opinion that this Writ Petition is devoid of any merit. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 27.01.2026 Mnr
5
135
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION No.15359 OF 2014
Dt: 27.01.2026 Mnr