APHC010294802026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 16067/2026 Between: 1. ANGURU NARAYANA RAO, S/O. LATE SRI GOPALAM AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. PLOT NO.41, PSR COLONY, RING ROAD VIZIANAGARAM - 535 002 2. ALLURI SIVA VARMA,, S/O. LATE SRI NARAYANA RAJU AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED TEACHER R/O. FLAT NO.101, BHARATHI EMPIRE DHARMAPURI ROAD, VIZIANAGARAM - 535 002 3. REGANA GOVINDA RAO,, S/O. LATE SRI ATCHAM NAIDU AGE.53 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR R/O. FLAT NO.A-404, OM SHAKTI TOWERS SRINIVASA NAGAR RING ROAD, VIZIANAGARAM - 535 002 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT., SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI -522 237, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA, UDYOG BHAVAN COMPLEX VIII, SIRIPURAM JUNCTION VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 003 REP. BY ITS METROPOLITAN COMMISSIONER 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM - 535 001 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VIZIANAGARAM - 535 001 5. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT, JAMMU NARAYANAPURAM - 535 006 VIZIANAGARAM MANDAL AND DISTRICT REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY 6. M/S SRI SRINIVASA NAGAR, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM AT D.NO.21-3- 117, IPPILI STREET, DASARI BANDHA VIZIANAGARAM - 535 001, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER YENNINTI APPALA RAJU ...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 proceedings of the 2nd Respondent bearing File No.1167/0018/LPNMRDA/2025 dated 13.05.2026, whereby and whereunder Tentative Layout Plan (TLP) of the 6tn Respondent was.approved as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the objections filed by the Petitioners through legal notice dated 30.03.2026 and provide opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders before granting Final Layout Plan (FLP) 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 grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the approval of Tentative Layout Plan (TLP) granted by the 2nd Respondent vide his proceedings bearing File No.1167/0018/LP /VMRDA/2025 dated 13.05.2026, pending disposal of the present writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. SOMISETTY GANESH BABU SC For VUDA and MUDA 3. K.P.S. SAILESH REDDY 4. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 16067 of 2026 ORDER:- 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction on part of the respondents in not considering the objections raised by the petitioners submitted on 30.03.2026 in the form of a legal notice and the proceedings dated 13.05.2026 issued by the respondent No.4 granting tentative layout plan issued by the 2nd respondent granting tentative layout plan in favour of respondent No.1 is also under challenge. 2. It is submitted that the petitioners are nearby residents of the area where the respondent has now sought tentative layout approval for development of a layout for residential purposes. It is submitted that the petitioners have informed the respondent authorities with regard to the six feet height compound wall encircling the layout admeasuring 80 acres of land in Survey No.60 of Jammu Narayanapuram village, Vizianagaram Mandal and District. It is alleged that the compound wall is erected in a high-handed and illegal manner without obtaining any permission. It is also the objection of the petitioners that the rain water would get inundated and submerge the roads and other low-lying areas surrounding the layout and that the compound wall deserves to be demolished. It is alleged that the said representation has not been considered so far by the respondent authorities. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2 on written instructions submits that the 4th respondent has issued a genuinity certificate over the subject lands and that the lands were recorded on the names of the pattadars. It is also submitted that the petitioners have no locus to file the present writ petition as they are not the immediate neighbours of the property which is proposed to be developed into a layout. It is also submitted that construction of a compound wall would not affect the petitioners or their properties as there is no scope for any inundation of water. The Execute Engineer of Irrigation Department has conducted a survey and also opined that the subject lands do not have any existing runoff lines or water courses passing through the subject survey numbers and that no water course is being disturbed by the proposed layout. 4. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel for the respondent No.2 and upon considering the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents shall pass appropriate orders on representation of the petitioners. It is left open for the petitioners to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dated 23.06.2026 KGM 124 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.16067 of 2026 Dated 23.06.2026 KGM