Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 29.06.2026 Date of uploading : 03.07.2026 APHC010305362026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY, THE 29th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 16319/2026 Between: 1. SOORA SAVITHRAMMA, W/O LATE SOORA GOVINDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO.401, B-BLOCK, GNAPIKA ENCLAVE APARTMENTS, OLD TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, TIRUPATI - 517501. 2. SOORA ANANDA KUMAR REDDY, S/O LATE SOORA GOVINDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO.401, B-BLOCK, GNAPIKA ENCLAVE APARTMENTS, OLD TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, TIRUPATI - 517501. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI-522237. 2. TIRUPATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT-517501. ...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, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature 2 of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering and disposing of my representation dated 28.03.2026 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to consider and dispose of the same in parity with the property tax assessment with adjacent property bearing D.No.10-3-221, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court after conducting physical inspection of the property 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 to direct the respondents not to initiate any coercive steps for recovery of the disputed property tax arrears, interest or penalties in respect of Assessment No.1012027585 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 3 Order:- The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the demand raised by the respondents calling upon the petitioners to pay house tax for an old building which was demolished in January, 2022. 2. It is submitted that the petitioners submitted a representation dated 28.03.2026 duly informing the respondent Corporation that there was no house existing and, therefore, the Corporation could not levy property tax by mentioning a door number. However, the respondents have not considered the representation of the petitioners and have called upon the petitioners to pay the demanded tax. 3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that, pursuant to the representation of the petitioners, the petitioners were issued a notice dated 23.06.2026 requiring them to appear on 27.06.2026. It is submitted that the petitioners did not turn up. 4. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners appeared and also submitted an explanation. 5. Considering the submissions, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage by setting aside the impugned notice and calling upon the 2nd respondent to duly consider the representation and explanation of the petitioners and pass an appropriate order. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 6. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 29.06.2026 PNS Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned ☑ Reportable Non-reportable ☑