APHC010231742026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11986/2026 Between: 1. TADIPRATI GANGA SATYAVATHI, W/O LATE SARASWATHIRAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT 1-81, ADDIRIPETA, THODANGI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT (FORMERLY EAST GODAVARI)-533401. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238 2. THEAPEPDCL, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, APEPDCL VISAKHAPATNAM, APEPDCL CORPORATE OFFICE, C/O 50275/1 TPT COLONY SEETHAMMADARA VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT- 530013 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, APEPDCL, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT- 531126 4. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, APEPDCL, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT- 531126 5. THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, APEPDCL, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT- 531126 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT-531126 2 7. THE TAHSLIDAR, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL,ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT-53112 8. KANUMURI MANOHAR RAJU, S/O K.SRUYANARAYANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT 2-147, GANDHI STREET, NEAR KONERU, AKIVEEDU AMNDAL, A.I. BHIMAVARAM - 534235 WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in erecting/constructing a transformer and providing electrical infrastructure in Survey No.210/2 affecting Survey No.208, in violation of the injunction order dated 28.02.2026 passed by the competent Civil Court, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to proceed with any such construction the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in erecting/constructing a transformer and providing electrical infrastructure in Survey No.210/2 affecting Survey No.208, in violation of the injunction order dated 28.02.2026 passed by the competent Civil Court, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to proceed with any such construction the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. THOKA DEVA DEEPAK ANIRUDH YADAV Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAM BABU DEVAVARAPU 2. GP FOR ENERGY 3 3. GP FOR REVENUE 4. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11986/2026 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in erecting/constructing a transformer and providing electrical infrastructure in Survey No.210/2 affecting Survey No.208, in violation of the injunction order dated 28.02.2026 passed by the competent Civil Court, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300- A of the Constitution of India and also violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to proceed with any such construction and pass such other order.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac.2.32 cents in Sy.No.208 and Ac.1.33 cents in Sy.No.210/2, Edadam Village, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Anakapalli District. While so, the unofficial respondent is carrying shrimp farming in respect of the land in Sy.No.210. For which, the unofficial respondent made a request/application for erecting transformer for carrying shrimp farming activities. Considering the 5 application of the unofficial respondent, the official respondents are trying to erect transformer in the petitioner’s land. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent herein filed counter-affidavit, wherein it is stated as under: “9. It is further submitted that his respondent is carrying on shrimp farming activities exclusively in survey No.210, which is entirely distinct, separate, and geographically satiated at a considerable distance from the petitioner’s land in survey No.208. The land in survey No.208 is located approximately 500 meters away from the land in survey No.210, and therefore the question of this respondent causing any encroachment, interference, or disturbance to the petitioner’s property does not arise whatsoever. 10. It is further submitted that the official respondents/competent authorities, conducted site inspection and physical verification of the lands in question, including survey No.208, and categorically found that no encroachment whatsoever has been committed by this respondent upon the petitioner’s land. The said official verification clearly establishes the falsity of the allegations leveled by the petitioner.” 5. Learned counsel for the unofficial respondent further submits that the subject land of the petitioner is 500 meters away from the land where the unofficial respondent has been cultivating shrimps farming and in which the respondents are proposed for erection of transformer. He further asserts that the petitioner is no 6 way concerned and his land is far away from the proposed construction of the transformer. 6. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5 submits that the respondents are taking steps for erection of transformer in other than the land of the petitioner and the respondents are not taking any steps for erection of the transformer in the land of the petitioner alleged by him. If even in the case of erection of subject transformer within the land of the petitioner, the respondents will follow due process of law. 7. Considering the submissions made by all the learned counsel, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can be disposed of directing respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioner, in the process of erecting any alleged transformer without following due process of law. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, if the respondents are erecting transformer by following due process of law, the property of the petitioner as well as 8th respondent should be demarcated by conducting proper survey in the presence of the petitioner as well as respondents. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to follow due procedure as observed above. 8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 7 As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 15.06.2026 TTPPSS//BBSSPP 8 39 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 11986/2026 15.06.2026 TTPPSS//BBSSPP