APHC010661172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 34270/2025 Between: Nunna Subba Lakshmi and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V S R S NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. P NANILU NAIDU The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that despite making a representation dated 27.11.2025 stating that the 5th respondent is making illegal construction of house without obtaining any plan approval from the authorities concerned and encroached a portion of petitioner’s private property, the respondent authorities have not acted upon. 2. Heard Sri V.S.R.S.Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat and Sri P.Nanilu Naidu, learned counsel for the 5th respondent. 3. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, Sri Y.Koteswara Rao, learned standing counsel for Gram Panchayat upon the instructions of Panchayat Secretary of Kesavaram Gram Panchayat submitted that the 5th respondent is proceeding with the construction without obtaining any plan or approval from the Gram Panchayat and they have already initiated necessary proceedings against the unauthorized construction by issuing show cause notice and submitted that they would take further steps in accordance with law. As such prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard. 4. Sri P.Nanilu Naidu, learned counsel for the 5th respondent reported no objection to pass orders in such lines. 5. In view of the submission made by the respondent authorities that they have already initiated necessary proceedings against the unauthorized construction by issuing show cause notice and that they would take further steps in accordance with law, instead of keeping the writ petition the pending, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following direction: “The respondent authorities are directed to take steps against the unauthorized construction made by the 5th respondent in accordance with law.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS