APHC010469252026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE 8th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25567 OF 2026 Between: 1. SMT. ANDIBOYINA JAYALAKSHMI,, W/O. SRI ANDIBOYINA APPALARAJU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC HOUSEHOLD DUTIES RIO. D.NO.18-35-1/2, CHINAKORADA, PEDAGANTYADA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER, ZONE-VI, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION, VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. TAHSILDAR, PEDAGANTYADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, , NEW PORT POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2 8. SRI GODDI PENTA RAO, S/O. RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O. D.NO. 19-17-8/1, KORADA VILLAGE, R.H.COLONY, PEDAGANTYADA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following order: Heard Sri V.V.Satish, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri ASC Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition is against the action of respondent Nos.2 to 7 in interfering with the subject land of an extent of 107 Sq. Yards in Plot No.1985, R.S.No.85/P, situated at Pedagantyada Rehabilitation Colony, Chinakorada, Visakhapatnam. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner obtained building permission for construction of a residential building consisting of G+2 floors in the year 2025. The respondent-Corporation, having been satisfied with the title documents, has accorded permission vide proceedings dated 3 04.06.2025 for construction of the subject residential building consisting of G+2 floors. 4. It is further submitted that the 8th respondent filed O.S.No.68 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, seeking permanent injunction against the petitioner’s husband, and the said suit was dismissed. After the demise of the petitioner’s husband, the petitioner acquired title to the subject property and obtained building permission from the respondent- Corporation. While the petitioner was proceeding with the construction in accordance with the building permission granted by the respondent- Corporation, the respondent Nos.2 to 5, at the behest of respondent No.8, are interfering with the said construction activity. 5. It is further contended that respondent No.8 has been pressurizing the Police Department and the Municipal Corporation to prevent the petitioner, in making construction. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the construction activity over the subject property. 6. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has placed before the Court a copy of the written instructions received from the Assistant City Planner, Gajuwaka Zone, GVMC. A perusal of the same would reflect that building permission was accorded subject to certain limitations. The said building permission was granted for construction of a G+2 residential 4 building. It is further stated that the petitioner is at liberty to commence construction in accordance with the building permission before its expiry on 04.06.2028. 7. It is further stated that the respondent-Corporation has not received any representation from the unofficial respondent or any communication from the other official respondents. It is further stated that there has been no interference with the petitioner’s construction activity by the respondent- Corporation. 8. The written instructions of the Assistant City Planner, Gajuwaka Zone, GVMC, are placed on record. 9. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of, as the grievance of the petitioner has been addressed. It is needless to observe that the respondent-Corporation shall not interfere with the petitioner’s construction activity, so long as the same is in accordance with the building permission. Any action by the respondent-Corporation in that regard shall be strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 08.09.2026 BSK 5 128 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25567 OF 2026 Dated: 08.09.2026 BSK