APHC010548482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 28599/2025 Between: 1. BOMMISETTI VENKAT RAMANA, BOMMISETTI VENKAT RAMANA, S/O. LATE PEDDA VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURE, R/O. OBULREDDIGARIPALLI H/O, SUDDAPALLI VILLAGE RAMAPURAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, RAMAPURAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUDDAMALLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, SUDDAMALLA VILLAGE, RAMAPURAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 4. THUMMAGINJALA RAJA, S/O. LATE DASULAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC.BANK EMPLOYEE, R/O. OBULREDDIGARIPALLI H/O, SUDDAPALLI VILLAGE RAMAPURAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 5. THUMMAGINJALA VENKATA SUBBAMMA, D/O. LATE DASULAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC CONDUCTOR (APSRTC) R/O. OBULREDDIGARIPALLI H/O, SUDDAPALLI VILLAGE, RAMAPURAM MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2 ...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 to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the inaction of the respondent in taking appropriate action for removing the illegally constructed shed on the road by preventing the petitioners ingress and egress to his house situated at Obulreddigaripalli H/o, Suddapalli Village, Ramapuram Mandal, Annamayya District, by considering his complaintdt. 19.09.2025, is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Panchayat Raj Act and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action for removing the illegally constructed shed on the road by preventing the petitioners ingress and egress to his house situated at Obulreddigaripalli H/o,Suddapalli Village, Ramapuram Mandal, Annamayya District, by considering his complaint dt.19- 09-2025, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. DASAM DURGA SHIVA SAI 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development for the 1st respondent, Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the 2nd respondent, Ms.Kavitha, learned counsel 3 representing Sri M.Sudhir, learned Standing counsel for the 3rd respondent and Sri Dasam Durga Shiva Sai, learned counsel for the respondents 4 and 5. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner constructed a house in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.82 of Suddamalla Village. A C.C. road exists on the Western side and the Katcha road on the Eastern side of the petitioner’s property. The respondents 4 and 5 constructed small rooms on the Katcha road situated on the eastern side of the petitioner’s property. The petitioner made a complaint to the Tahsildar, Ramapuram Mandal, 2nd respondent herein, for conducting the survey. The 2nd respondent inquired into the issue and issued an endorsement vide RG.No.ANMY20241214134 dated 14.12.2024 (Ex.P2). The petitioner requested the 3rd respondent to take action. However, the 3rd respondent failed to initiate any action. 3. The 2nd respondent submitted written instructions vide Roc.A/16/2026 dated 21.01.2026. 4. As per the written instructions, the petitioner owns an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.82 of Suddamalla Village, which is classified as Gramakantam, not as Panchat road or poramboke. The petitioner’s house lies in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents within Gramakantam. A C.C. road exists on the western side and a Katcha road on the eastern side. The dispute arose out of the family differences between the parties. There is no obstruction to the C.C. road on the western side, and it is open for ingress and egress. The structures complained of are within the habitation area shared by the relatives of the petitioner. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions and Ex.P2 filed along with the writ petition, the petitioner has access to the main road. The instructions would further indicate that the sheds were constructed within the habitation area. It seems there are disputes between the petitioner and the respondents 4 and 5, 4 and hence, the petitioner approached this Court to settle those disputes, which is an abuse of process. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any merit. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed, and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The interim order granted earlier shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 04.02.2026 SNI 5 274 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.28599 OF 2025 Dated: 04.02.2026 SNI