APHC010435882026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 24099 OF 2026 Between: 1. Kotaru Sanyasinaidu @Nanaji,, S/o Late Kotaru Rama Rao, Aged about 52 years,Occ.Business R/o. D. No. 9-16-133, Dharmavaram street Near Kanakamahalaxmi temple, Yelamanchili, Vishakhapatnam.531055 2. Kotaru Venkata Rao, S/o. Kotaru Pentayya Simhachalam, Occ.Business R/o. D. No. A-406,1-2-234/A406, Sai Gayathri Thota Residency, Vaishnavi Nagar, Kothapet, Saroornagar, Hyderabad - 500035. ...Petitioners AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Secretariat buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati.522238 2. The Yelamanchilii Municipality, Rep Municipal Commissioner, Yelamanchili, Anakapalle.531001 3. The District Collector, Anakapalle District. 531001 4. The Tahsildar, Yelamanchili, Anakapalle District. 531001 5. The State Government Pensioners Association, Taluka Unit, Yelamanchili, Rep. by its Secretary, Gaganam Sambamurthy S/o. Late Parvateesam, old SBI Colony, Yelamanchili, Anakapalle District.531055 2 ...Respondents 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 toissue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ or order or other direction to declare the inaction of official respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioner herein dt. 07.07.2026 and 09.07.2026 followed by RTI applications 01.08.2026 and 12.08.2026 to furnish the relevant proceedings and documents in favour of the respondents with respect to the illegal construction being made by the 5th respondent in an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents of land out of an extent of Ac. 0.50 cents in Old S. No. 404 and New S. No. 54/4, Yelamanchali, which is the ancestral property of the petitioners herein, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently, COMMAND the respondents to consider the representations and RTI applications submitted by the petitioner and subsequently direct the respondents for not to make any further constructions in the subject land, in the interest of justice 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 DIRECT the respondents not to make any further construction in the subject property of an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents including not to alter the physical features of the subject land and not to transfer/allocate the further extent of land pending disposal of the main writ petition a Counsel for the Petitioners: P RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents: SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI SC For MUNICIPALITIES Counsel for the Respondents: M BALASUBRAHMANYAM 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 24099 OF 2026 The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri P. Raja Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents/Municipality and Sri M. Balasubrahmanyam, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5/caveator. 2. The grievance of the petitioners in the instant Writ Petition is against the inaction of the respondents in considering the representations of the petitioners dated 07-07-2026, 09-07-2026 and RTI applications dated 10-08- 2026 and 12-08-2026 and sought for a consequential direction to the respondents not to make further constructions in respect of the subject land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents out of an extent of Ac.0.50 cents in old Sy.No.404 and New Sy.No.54/4, Yelamanchali, Anakapalle. 3. The petitioner contends that out of total extent of Ac.0.50 cents in Sy.No.54/4 corresponding to old Sy.No.404, an extent of Ac.0.03 cents was allotted by 2nd respondent Municipality in favour of the unofficial respondent classified as Grama Khantam land without authority of law. It is contended that the old Sy.No.404 is standing in the name of the petitioner’s great grandfather, Sri Kotaru Ganisayya. In support of the said contention, the petitioner relies on the registered lease deed dated 16.02.1933 bearing Doc.No.1460 of 1933 executed by him in favour of one Potharaj for 99 years. The respondents in 4 disregard to the same had alienated the same in favour of the unofficial respondent vide resolution with the Municipal Council, and no proceedings were issued to the effect of such an alienation. It is contended that the subject extent of land is classified in the revenue records as Grama Khantam, which vests with the Gram Panchayat and the respondent No.2 has no right to alienate the same, unless a notification is issued by the Government under the provisions of Section 58 of AP Panchyat Raj Act, 1994. It is contended that objecting the said alienation, the petitioner had made representations, however, the same were not considered the 2nd respondent. Thus approached this Court by way of the instant Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5 submits that the petitioner has no locus to challenge the allotment made in favour of the 5th respondent as the subject land is Government land, and the respondents have rightly alienated the property in their favour for establishing a building for the welfare of the pensioners. He further placed before the Court certain documents to contend that the Collector had granted permission to Gram Panchayat in 1987 to sell away a piece of land in Sy.No.54/4 on payment of costs as per the Government rate to third parties. In the light of the same, the subject land is no longer the Panchayat land. 5. Having regard to the contentions advanced, as the grievance of the petitioner is pending for consideration before the respondent No.2, this Court without going into merits of the case deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, directing the respondent No.2 to pass appropriate orders on the 5 representations of the petitioners dated 07-07-2026, 09-07-2026 and RTI applications dated 10-08-2026 and 12-08-2026, within a period of six (06) weeks, from the date of receipt of this Order, after hearing both the petitioners and the unofficial respondent No.5. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners pending consideration of the representations seeks a direction to the respondents not to make any further construction in respect of the subject land. In the said regard, this Court grants liberty to the petitioners to file an application before the 2nd respondent seeking such relief of restraining the respondent No.5 from making further constructions. Upon filing of such an application, the respondent No.2/Municipality is directed to pass appropriate orders within a period one (01) week from the date of filing such an application, after hearing both the petitioners and the unofficial respondent No.5. Needless to observe that the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the contentions. 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 11-09-2026 Note: Issue CC today B/o. MSI 6 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 24099 OF 2026 Dated: 11-09-2026 Note: Issue CC today B/o. MSI