APHC010438232024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 22306 of 2024 Bench Sr.No:-21 [3552] Rayavarapu Eshwara Malleswara Rao ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Abdul Masthan S representing Mr. V V Satish Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): Mr. A S C Bose (SC for municipal Corporations) for R.3 & R.4 CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 3rd February, 2026 P C : In the present writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order, dated 03.04.2024 passed by the Lokayukta. 2. It appears that the petitioner had raised some construction on the ground and first floor in Gajuwaka junction in ward No.66 without seeking any permission. It further appears from the record that the Zonal Commissioner, Gajuwaka Zone-IV issued notices under Section 452 & 456(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 directing the petitioner to stop the work. There also appeared to be a dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.5 – Maddi Govinda Reddy, who approached the office of the Lokayukta with the present complaints, with regard to the subject building, 2 HCJ & CGR, J WP_22306_2024 3. A report was sought from the Zonal Commissioner who submitted in his report, dated 19.09.2022, that show cause notices had been issued to the petitioner along with the town planning officer who had failed to take action against the unauthorized construction. It was also stated in the action taken report, dated 14.03.2022 that the authorities had since demolished the subject unauthorized construction. Besides this, it was also reported that an explanation from the town planning officer and another had been sought in regard to the unauthorized construction in the prohibited area. 4. It is in those circumstances, after the filing of the report, the Lokayukta closed the complaints by recording the factum of action already having been taken with regard to the building in question. 5. The petitioner in the instant case is aggrieved of that part of the direction issued by the Lokayukta whereby the Zonal Commissioner, GVMC Zone IV, Gajuwaka, had been directed to issue suitable instructions to the concerned staff to keep a constant watch and not to allow any further unauthorized construction in the subject prohibited area. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the direction to the Zonal Commissioner to not allow any further unauthorized construction was impermissible inasmuch as the Lokayukta at best can make a 3 HCJ & CGR, J WP_22306_2024 recommendation and not issue any directions in the nature as has been done in the order impugned passed by the Lokayukta. 7. While the petitioner may be correct that the power and authority of the Office of Lokayukta can be found to make recommendations to the Government for appropriate action, yet we feel that no interference is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case especially where the petitioner has failed to establish as to how he had a right to raise any construction unauthorisedly in the said area where construction appears to have been prohibited. 8. We find no merit in the present petition which is accordingly dismissed. We make it however clear that in case the petitioner seeks to raise any construction, if it is otherwise permissible in the said zone, the construction would be raised only after obtaining appropriate permission from the authorities concerned. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J Vjl