Yuvajana Shramika Rythu Congress Party Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh Case Summary You Can Listen To on Caseon

0 04 Jul, 2024
Listen in 02:00 mins | Read in mins

Yuvajana Shramika Rythu Congress Party Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh High Court W.P. No.13258 of 2024

Link copied!

Case Background

Bench

Applied Acts & Sections

No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case

Hello! How can I help you? 😊

Disclaimer: We do not store your data.

Document Text Version

* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

+ WRIT PETITION Nos.13258, 13212, 13240, 13244,

13248, 13249, 13250, 13251, 13253, 13254, 13272,

13382, 13389, 13393, 13396, 13397, 13408, 13410,

13412, 13540 and 13557 of 2024

% 04.07.2024

W.P. No.13258 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY,

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522 501.

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY (YSRCP), PYLA

NARASIMHAIAH, S/O. PYLA OBULESU, AGE 56 YEARS,

GANDHINAGAR, TADIPATRI ANANTAPUR, ANDHRA

PRADESH -515 411.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL A DMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. HOME DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

3. THE ANANTAPU R MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY

ITS COMMISSIONER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

DISTRICT.

4. DEPUTY CITY PLANNER, ANANTAPUR MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

5. ANANTAPURAMUHINDUPUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP. BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

6. PLANNING OFFICER, ANANTAPURAMU- HINDUPUR

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

7. THES H O, ANATAPURAMU III TOWN POLICE STATION,

ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13212 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #N. YERRISWAMY,, S/O LATE NARAPPA, AGED ABOUT

55 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 17- 232, AMARAVATINAGAR,

ADONI-518 301, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTR ATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE MUNICIPALITY OF ADONI, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, ADONI MUNICIPALITY,

KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13240 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., K.SURESH

BABU, S/O. LATE K.KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56

YEARS, R/O. DOORNO.37/120, KONDAYA PALLI,

MANASAKALYANA MANDAPAM STREET, Y.S.R DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS.

VELAGAPUDI.AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT. REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ANNAMAYYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

REDDY COLONY, CHINNA CHOWK, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT, REP., BY ITS CHARIMAN

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13244 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI.

LELLAAPPI REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA

TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. .SRI.BUKKAPATNAM NAVEEN NISCHAL,, THE DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU

CONGRESSPARTY(YSRCP), PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATY

SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, A.P.

2. PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY, PUTTAPARTHY, SRI

SATYA SAI DISTRICT REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,

3. THE COMMISSIONER, PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY,

PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT,

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13248 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYUTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI.

LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT PLOT

NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWERS TADEPALLI, GUNTUR -

522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT SRI.

KURASALKANNA BABU KAKINADA DISTRICT AT D. NO.

68-12-8, PYDAVARI STREET RAJESWARI NAGAR,

KAKINADA RURAL KAKINADA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION KAKINADA

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13249 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY (NELLORE DISTRICT

COMMITTEE),, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SY.NO. 2222- 2,

VENKATESWARAPURAM AREA, NELLORE BIT- II,

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,

MR.LELLA APPI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH

3. NELLORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NUDA,

REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13250 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS

PARTY(YSRCP), REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY

SRI. LEILA APPI REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA

TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, KOLA GURUVUIU YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY( YSRCP)

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH..

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. GREATER VIS HAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, (GVMC) REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER,

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (GVMC), VISAKHAPATNAM,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (VMRDA), REP BY THE

COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

5. THE COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN

REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (VMRDA),

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13251 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL

SECRETARYLELLA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY,

AGE- 57 YEARS,SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLE, ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP .BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH, S/O. LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS,YSRC

PARTY OFFICE KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH,, S/O.LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS, YSRC

PARTY OFFICE,KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DIS TRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPALADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND

UD)DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

A.P.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13253 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT DHARMANA

KRISHNA DAS, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM NAIDU, AGE-

ABOUT 58 YEARS,, YSRC PARTY OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM,

SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. DHARMANA KRISHNA DAS,, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM

NAIDU, AGE- ABOUT 58 YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,

SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUN ICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD)

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, SRIKAKULAM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION , SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM

DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13254 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETAIY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL

CHIEF SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.

2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, ZONE- VII, GREATER

VISAKHAPATNAM CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13272 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,, A

RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY, OFFICE - PLOT NO. 13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501, REP. BY LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, 0PP. JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR- 522006

2. SITRASATHYANARAYANAMMA,, W/O SITR A RAMA

KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O H.NO.50 - 771 - A,

DEVANAGAR, B CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGRESS PARTY DISTRICT

COMMITTEE, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, N.R. PETA,

KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. KURNOOL URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUDA, .

A CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13382 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEIL A APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJUPETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. MAJJI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O NARASINGA RAO, AGED

ABOUT 42 YEARS. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O 8-18- 120,

PRADEEP NAGAR, NEAR CONSUMER COURT,

VIZIANAGARAM.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. VIZIANAGARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, VIZIANAGARAM.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13389 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), PLOT NO.13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRIET REP., BY ITS STATE

GENERAL SEERETARY AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,

LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. LEILA SAMBI REDDY AGED

ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO.203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP- JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. $G.SRIKANTH REDDY,, S/O. MOHAN REDDY, AGED

ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC- EX- MLA ., AND DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS

PARTY (YSRCP) ANNAMAYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTY,

OFFICE AT D.NO.37/4- 5, S.N.COLONY, RAYACHOTY,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIP AL ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,

VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN

3. VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI GRAMPANCHAYAT,

VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI, RAYACHOTY MANDAL,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT REP., BY ITS PANCHAYAT

SECRETARY

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13393 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, A

RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY, OFFICE . PLOT NO.13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI. GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501. REP. BY LELLA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEAS S, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOWERS.

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP. JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR. GUNTUR- 522006

2. VEMPALLI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O V.SURYANARAYANA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. R/O DOOR NO.11 - 63 - 63,

BRAMHMIN STREET, NEAR RAM MANDIR,

MALLIKARJUNA PETA, VIJAYAWADA. KRISHNA

DISTRICT. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGRESS

PARTY DISTRICT COMMITTEE, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI.

AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. VIJAYAWADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIO N, . VIJAYAWADA

CITY, KRISHNA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13396 of 2024:-

Between:

1.# YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,

PERNI VENKATA RAMAIAH NANI, AGE 57 YEARS,

R/O.23/346, RAMANAIDUPETA, MACHILIPATNAM,

KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA

DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MACHILIPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP

BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MACHILIPATNAM

KRISHNADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. THE MACHILIPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN,

MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13397 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LELLAAPPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS ,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS KATASANI RAM BHUPAL REDDY,

S/O. KATASANINARASIMHA REDDY, AGE ABOUT64

YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,NANDYALA,

NANDYALADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MAANDUD) DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NAN DYALA DISTRICT,

NANDYALA, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. NANDYALA MUNICIPALITY, REP BY ITS.. THE MUNICIPAL

COMMISSIONER, NANDYALA, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13408 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT, ALLA

KALI KRISHNA SRINIVAS, C/O. ALLA SURYA CHANDRA

RAO (LATE), AGE 55 YEARS,R/O.11- 70/2,SRI RAM

NAGAR, 11TH ROAD, ALLA NANI GARI

HOUSE,SANIVARAPU PETA, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ELURU, ELURUDISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP BY

ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13410 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CO NGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRES IDENT

SRI.PARIKSHIT RAJU PARVATIPURAM

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE PARVATHIPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTE D BY

ITS COMMISSIONER PARVATHIPURAM

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.133412 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LEILA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVAR A TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

SRI. MOPIDEVI VENKATA RAMANA RAO BAPATLA

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIP AL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. THE BAPATLA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER BAPATLA

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13540 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETARY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDH RA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

BHIMAVARAM.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (EUDA)

REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON/ CHAIRMAN,

CHANDRAGUPTA COLONY, LUNANI NAGAR, ELURU,

SANIVARAPUPETA, ANDHRA PRADESH-534002.

5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM,

WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

6. THE TAHSILDAR, UNDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI

DISTRICT.

7. THE NRP AGRAHARAM GRAM PANC HAYAT, IS

REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, UNDI

MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13557 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEILA APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJUPETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. GOPIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O VENKATESWARA

REDDY DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O NARASARAOPET,

PALNADU DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, RE P.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. PALNADU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP. BY

ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

NARASARAOPET.

...RESPONDENT(S):

! Counsel for the petitioners : 1. M/s.VMR LEGAL

2. SRI V.R.REDDY KOVVURI

3. SRI A.SYAM SUNDER

REDDY

4. SRI HARSIH KUMAR

RASINENI

5. SRI R.YELLA REDDY

6. SRI SAI MANOJ REDDY.L

7. SRI Y.NAGI REDDY

8. SRI TAGORE YADAV

YARAGORLA

9. SRI V.SURENDRA REDDY

10. SRI VIVEKANANDA

VIROOPAKSHA

11. SRI SHAGUFTA JAHAN

NOOR

12. SRI J.UGRANARASIMHA

13. SRI NAIDU SIVA RAMA

KRISHNA

^ Counsel for the respondents: 1. ADVOCATE GENERAL

2. GP FOR HOME

3. GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINSITRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

4. GP FOR REVENUE

<Gist:

>Head Note:

? Cases referred:

1. AIR 1995 AP 17

* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

+ WRIT PETITION Nos.13258, 13212, 13240, 13244,

13248, 13249, 13250, 13251, 13253, 13254, 13272,

13382, 13389, 13393, 13396, 13397, 13408, 13410,

13412, 13540 and 13557 of 2024

W.P. No.13258 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY,

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522 501.

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY (YSRCP), PYLA

NARASIMHAIAH, S/O. PYLA OBULESU, AGE 56 YEARS,

GANDHINAGAR, TADIPATRI ANANTAPUR, ANDHRA

PRADESH -515 411.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETA RY. HOME DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

3. THE ANANTAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY

ITS COMMISSIONER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

DISTRICT.

4. DEPUTY CITY PLANNER, ANANTAPUR MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

5. ANANTAPURAMUHINDUPUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP. BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

6. PLANNING OFFICER, ANANTAPURAMU- HINDUPUR

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

7. THES H O, ANATAPURAMU II I TOWN POLICE STATION,

ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13212 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #N. YERRISWAMY,, S/O LATE NARAPPA, AGED ABOUT

55 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 17- 232, AMARAVATINAGAR,

ADONI-518 301, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE MUNICIPALITY OF ADONI, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

3. THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, ADONI MUNICIPALITY,

KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13240 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., K.SURESH

BABU, S/O. LA TE K.KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56

YEARS, R/O. DOORNO.37/120, KONDAYA PALLI,

MANASAKALYANA MANDAPAM STREET, Y.S.R DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDI NGS.

VELAGAPUDI.AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT. REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ANNAMAYYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

REDDY COLONY, CHINNA CHOWK, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT, REP., BY ITS CHARIMAN

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13244 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI.

LELLAAPPI REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA

TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. .SRI.BUKKAPATNAM NAVEEN NISCHAL,, TH E DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU

CONGRESSPARTY(YSRCP), PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATY

SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMEN T, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, A.P.

2. PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY, PUTTAPARTHY, SRI

SATYA SAI DISTRICT REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,

3. THE COMMISSIONER, PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY,

PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT,

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13248 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYUTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI.

LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT PLOT

NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWERS TADEPALLI, GUNTUR -

522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT SRI.

KURASALKANNA BABU KAKINADA DISTRICT AT D. NO.

68-12-8, PYDAVARI STREET RAJESWARI NAGAR,

KAKINADA RURAL KAKINADA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESEN TED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE COMMISSIONER, KAKINADA MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION KAKINADA

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13249 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY (NELLORE DISTRICT

COMMITTEE),, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SY.NO. 2222- 2,

VENKATESWARAPURAM AREA, NELLORE BIT- II,

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,

MR.LELLA APPI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETAR Y MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH

3. NELLORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NUDA,

REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13250 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS

PARTY(YSRCP), REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY

SRI. LEILA APPI REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA

TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DI STRICT

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, KOLA GURUVUIU YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY(YSRCP)

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH..

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, (GVMC) REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER,

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATI ON (GVMC), VISAKHAPATNAM,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (VMRDA), REP BY THE

COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

5. THE COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN

REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (VMR DA),

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13251 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL

SECRETARYLELLA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY,

AGE- 57 YEARS,SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLE, ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH, S/O. LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS,YSRC

PARTY OFFICE KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH,, S/O.LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEAR S, YSRC

PARTY OFFICE,KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPALADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND

UD)DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GO DAVARI DISTRICT,

A.P.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13253 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT DHARMANA

KRISHNA DAS, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM NAIDU, AGE-

ABOUT 58 YEARS,, YSRC PARTY OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM,

SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. DHARMANA KRISHNA DAS,, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM

NAIDU, AGE- ABOUT 58 YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,

SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD)

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM D ISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, SRIKAKULAM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM

DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13254 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETAIY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL

CHIEF SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.

2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, ZONE- VII, GREATER

VISAKHAPATNAM CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13272 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,, A

RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY, OFFICE - P LOT NO. 13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501, REP. BY LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN R OAD, 0PP. JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR- 522006

2. SITRASATHYANARAYANAMMA,, W/O SITRA RAMA

KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O H.NO.50 - 771 - A,

DEVANAGAR, B CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGRESS PARTY DISTRICT

COMMITTEE, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, N.R. PETA,

KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. KURNOOL URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUDA, .

A CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13382 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEILA APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJUPETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. MAJJI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O NARASINGA RAO, AGED

ABOUT 42 YEARS. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O 8-18- 120,

PRADEEP NAGAR, NEAR CONSUMER COURT,

VIZIANAGARAM.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. VIZIANAGARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, VIZIANAGARAM.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13389 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), PLOT NO.13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRIET REP., BY ITS STATE

GENERAL SEERETARY AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,

LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. LEILA SAMBI REDDY AGED

ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO.203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP- JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. $G.SRIKANTH REDDY,, S/O. MOHAN REDDY, AGED

ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC- EX- MLA ., AND DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS

PARTY (YSRCP) ANNAMAYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTY,

OFFICE AT D.NO.37/4- 5, S.N.COLONY, RAYACHOTY,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,

VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN

3. VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI GRAMPANCHAYAT,

VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI, RAYACHOTY MANDAL,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT REP., BY ITS PANCHAYAT

SECRETARY

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13393 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, A

RECOGNIZED POL ITICAL PARTY, OFFICE . PLOT NO.13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI. GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501. REP. BY LELLA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEAS S, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOW ERS.

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP. JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR. GUNTUR- 522006

2. VEMPALLI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O V.SURYANARAYANA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. R/O DOOR NO.11 - 63 - 63,

BRAMHMIN STREET, NEAR RAM MANDIR,

MALLIKARJUNA PETA, VIJAYAWADA. KRISHNA

DISTRICT. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGRESS

PARTY DISTRICT COMMITTEE, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARI AT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI.

AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. VIJAYAWADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, . VIJAYAWADA

CITY, KRISHNA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13396 of 2024:-

Between:

1.# YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,

PERNI VENKATA RAMAIAH NANI, AGE 57 YEARS,

R/O.23/346, RAMANAIDUPETA, MACHILIPATNAM,

KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELO PMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA

DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MACHILIPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP

BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MACHILIPATNAM

KRISHNADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. THE MACHILIPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN,

MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13397 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LELLAAPPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS KATASANI RAM BHUPAL REDDY,

S/O. KATASANINA RASIMHA REDDY, AGE ABOUT64

YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,NANDYALA,

NANDYALADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MAANDUD) DEPARTMENT ,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

NANDYALA, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. NANDYALA MUNICIPALITY, REP BY ITS.. THE MUNICIPAL

COMMISSIONER, NANDYALA, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13408 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANASHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA S HRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT, ALLA

KALI KRISHNA SRINIVAS, C/O. ALLA SURYA CHANDRA

RAO (LATE), AGE 55 YEARS,R/O.11- 70/2,SRI RAM

NAGAR, 11TH ROAD, ALLA NANI GARI

HOUSE,SANIVARAPU PETA, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ELURU, ELURUDISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP BY

ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13410 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

SRI.PARIKSHIT RAJU PARVATIPURAM

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE PARVATHIPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER PARVATHIPURAM

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.133412 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GE NERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LEILA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

SRI. MOPIDEVI VENKATA RAMANA RAO BAPATLA

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. THE BAPATLA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER BAPATLA

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13540 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETARY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRIC T,

BHIMAVARAM.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (EUDA)

REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON/ CHAIRMAN,

CHANDRAGUPTA COLONY, LUNANI NAGAR, ELURU,

SANIVARAPUPETA, ANDHRA PRADESH-534002.

5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM,

WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

6. THE TAHSILDAR, UNDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI

DISTRICT.

7. THE NRP AGRAHARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, IS

REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, UNDI

MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

W.P. No.13557 of 2024:-

Between:

1. #YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEILA APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJUPETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. GOPIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O VENKATESWARA

REDDY DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O NA RASARAOPET,

PALNADU DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. $THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. PALNADU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y, REP. BY

ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

NARASARAOPET.

...RESPONDENT(S):

DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED: 04.07.2024.

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may

be allowed to see the Order? Yes/No

2. Whether the copies of order may be marked

to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No

3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the fair

Copy of the Order? Yes/No

_______________________________

JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

APHC010269362024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13258/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY,

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522 501.

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY (YSRCP), PYLA

NARASIMHAIAH, S/O. PYLA OBULESU, AGE 56 YEARS,

GANDHINAGAR, TADIPATRI ANANTAPUR, ANDHRA

PRADESH -515 411.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. HOME DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

3. THE ANANTAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY

ITS COMMISSIONER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

DISTRICT.

4. DEPUTY CITY PLANNER, ANANTAPUR MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

5. ANANTAPURAMUHINDUPUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP. BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

6. PLANNING OFFICER, ANANTAPURAMU- HINDUPUR

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

7. THES H O, ANATAPURAMU III TOWN POLICE STATION,

ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR 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 tomay be pleased to issue an

appropriate writ more fully in the nature of Writ of mandamus, order

or direction to declare the (i) action of the respondents in

proposing/proceeding to demolish the building of the petitioner in

land upto an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy.No.136-1B1B2A2, HLC

Colony, Anantapur under the guise of the Provisional Order vide

Notice No 01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated U.C. Notice Order

vide22.06.2024 and Provisional NO.02/2024/AHUDA dated

22.06.2024 even without passing the Conformation Order as

stipulated under the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act.

1955 and Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban

Development Authority Act, 2016 (ii) Provisional Order issued

under Section 452(1) and 461(1) of Andhra Notice1955 vide

Municipal Corporation Act Pradesh No01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024

dated 22.06.2024 issued by the 3 respondent and Provisional

Order issued under Section 84(5), 88, 89(1), (2), 90 and 91 of

Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development

Authority Act, 2016 vide U.C.Notice NO.02/2024/AHUDA dated

22.06.2024 issued by the 4th respondent for it being per se illegal,

manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, irrational, perverse, unfair,

biased, preposterous, whimsical, capricious, unconscionable,

unconstitutional besides being violative of Principles of Natural

Justice besides being opposed to the very spirit and object of

Justice and Fair-play and Fundamental Rights guaranteed under

Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and to pass

such

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to stay the

operation of the Provisional Order vide Notice No

01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 and Provisional Order

vide U.C.Notice No.02/2024/AHUDA dated 22.06.2024, pending

disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the

petitioner over the land upto an extent ot Ac.1.50 cents in

Sy.No.136-1B1B2A2, HLC Colony, Anantapur and the building that

is under construction, under the guise of the Provisional Order vide

Notice No 01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 and

Provisional Order vide U.C,Notice No.02/20/ 4/AHUDA dated

22.06.2024, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. VMR LEGAL

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010268652024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13240/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PAR TY

(YSRCP), KADAPA CITY, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., K.SURESH

BABU, S/O. LATE K.KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56

YEARS, R/O. DOORNO.37/120, KONDAYA PALLI,

MANASAKALYANA MANDAPAM STREET, Y.S.R DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS. VELAGAPUDI.AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT. REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ANNAMAYYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

REDDY COLONY, CHINNA CHOWK, KADAPA, Y.S.R

DISTRICT, REP., BY ITS CHARIMAN

...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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus

declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in trying to pull down

the construction raised the petitioner in the land in an extent of

Ac.0.24 cents out Ac.2.00 Cents Sy.No.424/3 of Kadapa Village

and Mandal, Y.S.R District (Plot No.38/240-65,

Ramanajaneyapuram Street, Ramanjaneyapuram) in pursuance of

the Notice No.376/1013/KDP/2024, dated 22.06.2024 issued by

him, without considering the explanation, dated 25.06.2024

submitted by the petitioner being the President of the petitioner as

arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provision of the Andhra Pradesh

Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and also the well established legal

principles apart from being violative of the fundamental and the

Constitutional rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14,

19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to

direct the respondent No.2 not to proceed further inpursuance of

the Notice No.376/1013/KDP/2024, dated 22.06.2024 issued by

him without considering the explanation, dated 25.06.2024

submitted by me and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 direct the respondent

No.2 not to proceed further in pursuance of the Notice

No.376/1013/KDP/2024, dated 22.06.2024 issued by him, pending

disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 direct the respondent

No.2 to consider the application, dated 25.06.2024 submitted by the

petitioner under Section 455-A of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal

Corporation Act, 1955 and take appropriate action on the same,

pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V R REDDY KOVVURI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010268302024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13212/2024

Between:

1. N. YERRISWAMY,, S/O LATE NARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55

YEARS, R/O D.NO. 17-232, AMARAVATINAGAR, ADONI-

518 301, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT BUILDING, , VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE MUNICIPALITY OF ADONI, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

3. THE TOWN PLANNI NG OFFICER, ADONI MUNICIPALITY,

KURNOOL 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 2 and 3 in

attempting to demolish or seize my building in an extent of 294.66

Sq.yards consisting Groundplus3 floors RCC building, situated in

D.No.21-114, Plot No.7, Survey Nos.83/2, 85/1, 86, 87/A1, 87/A2,

87/A3 and 89 of Vengalapuram Village, Adoni Mandal, Kurnool

District, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of fundamental rights

guaranteed under Article 20, 21, more particularly, the property

right guaranteed under Article 300A of Constitution and violation of

A.P. Municipality Act, 1965 by holding that the notice dt.25-06-2024

under Notice NO.16/1015/AND/UC/2024 is meant to take political

vendetta against my sub lessee and contrary to their order dt.24-

06-2024 under building permit NO.1015/0153/B/AMC/SKDC/2021

and consequently set aside the notice dt.25- 06-2024 under Notice

No.16/1015/AND/UC/2024 and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 direct the Respondents

2 & 3 not to take any coercion steps in furtherance of the notice

dt.25-06-2024 under Notice No.16/1015/AND/UC/2024 without

availing the Petitioner an opportunity, without following due process

of law till disposal of the Writ Petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010268882024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13244/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI.

LELLAAPPI REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA

TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. .SRI.BUKKAPATNAM NAVEEN NISCHAL,, THE DISTRI CT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU

CONGRESSPARTY(YSRCP), PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATY

SAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRE TARIAT

BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, A.P.

2. PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY, PUTTAPARTHY, SRI

SATYA SAI DISTRICT REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER,

3. THE COMMISSIONER, PUTTAPARTHY MUNICIPALITY,

PUTTAPARTHY, SRI SATYA SAI 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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or

Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of

declaring Mandamus the notice bearing

U.C.NO.06/1155/PTP/UC/2023 dated 24.06.2024 issued by the 3rd

respondent as illegal arbitrary and unjust and contrary to the -

provisions of A.P.Municipalities Act, 1965 and in violation of

principles of natural justice besides violation off the petitioners

rights guaranteed under Articles 14,21 and 300A of the Constitution

of India and consequently set a side the said notice and pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to suspend the

notice bearing U.C.No.06/1155/PTP/UC/2023 dated 24.06.2024

issued by the 3rd respondent duly directing the respondents not to

take any steps to demolish the building of the petitioner under u

construction in an extent of land A.c 1.30 cents in Sy. No. 666- 6A1

and A.c 0.70 cents in Sy. No. 666-7A1 at Puttaparty Village and

Mandal, Sri Satya Sai Districtand pass such

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010268972024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13248/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYUTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI.

LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT PLOT

NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWERS TADEPALLI, GUNTUR -

522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,

REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT SRI.

KURASALKANNA BABU KAKINADA DISTRICT AT D. NO.

68-12-8, PYDAVARI STREET RAJESWARI NAGAR,

KAKINADA RURAL KAKINADA DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE COMMISSIONER, KAK INADA MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION KAKINADA

...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 Respondents in issuing notice dated June 22, 2024 under

Section 452(1) and 461 (1) read with 428, 429 of the AP Municipal

Corporation Act, 1955 and Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90 (1)

of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) alleging that the YSR

Congress Party Office situated at D. No. 68-12-8 situated at

PydaVari Street, Rajeswari Nagar Area, which is under construction

is constructed deviating the municipal laws and sought for sufficient

cause as to why the unauthorised construction should not be

removed / altered or pulled down with 7 days from the date of

receipt of the said demand notice as illegal, arbitrary and violative

of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19, 21 and 300-A

of the Constitution of India and consequently to declare the

proceedings initiated by the Respondent under Section 452(1) and

461 (1) of the AP Municipal Corporation Act and Section 89 (1 and

2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016)

and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay all further

proceedings on Respondents in issuing notice dated June 22, 2024

under Section 452(1) & 461 (1) read with 428, 429 of the AP

Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and Section 89 (1 & 2) read with

82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) alleging that

the YSR Congress Party Office situated at D. No. 68-12-8 situated

at PydaVari Street, Rajeswari Nagar Area, which is under

construction is constructed deviating the municipal laws and sought

for sufficient cause as to why the unauthorised construction should

not be removed / altered or pulled down with 7 days from the date

of receipt of the said demand notice as illegal, arbitrary and

violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19, 21

and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to declare

the proceedings initiated by the Respondent under Section 452(1)

& 461 (1) of the AP Municipal Corporation Act and Section 89 (1 &

2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016)

and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. R YELLA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010269262024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13250/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY(YSRCP),

REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI. LEILA APPI

REDDY, PLOT NO. 13 , SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP ,

TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,, KOLA GURUVUIU YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY(YSRCP)

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH..

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADM INISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, (GVMC) REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER,

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER VISHAKHAPATN AM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (GVMC), VISAKHAPATNAM,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (VMRDA), REP BY THE

COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

5. THE COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN

REGION DEVE LOPMENT AUTHORITY (VMRDA),

VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...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 toleased to issue a Writ, Order or

Direction more particularly one in nature of Mandamus declaring

the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the show cause notice

E-382346/2024/ACP-II dated 21.06.2024 and also the notice vide

Letter.No.SWO/1167/2023/0102 dated 21.06.2024 issued by the

4th respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art.14, 21 and

300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the

same and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 suspend the show cause

notice E- 382346/2024/ACP-ll dated 21.06.2024 and also the notice

vide Let ter.No.SWO/1167/2023/0102 dated 21.06.2024 and direct

the respondents not to take any coercive action against the

petitioner’s building located at Sy.No. 174/4, Yendada Village,

Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam including its

demolition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. SAI MANOJ REDDY L

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010268782024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13251/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL

SECRETARYLELLA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY,

AGE- 57 YEARS,SURYADEVARA TOWN SHIP,

TADEPALLE, ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH, S/O. LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS,YSRC

PARTY OFFICE KOTHAPETA, NH-16, RAJANAGARA M,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH,, S/O.LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS, YSRC

PARTY OFFICE,KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPALADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMEN T (MA AND

UD)DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

A.P.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or

order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS6 declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3in

issuing the impugned Proceedings vide

U.C.No.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03 dated 22.06.2024 and

proposing to demolish the partially erected building structure

situated at Sy.No. 107/7 situated at Suviseshapuram Area,

Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation limits, as illegal.

Arbitrary, High- Handedness, Violative of Principles of natural

justice. Contrary to the provisions of A.P.Metropolitan Region and

Urban Development Authorities Act- 2016, A.P.Building Rules -

2017 and A.P.Municipal Corporation Act - 1955 apart from violation

of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and

Consequentially, to set-aside the impugned Proceedings issued by

the Respondent.No.3 vide U.C.No.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03

dated 22.06.2024and/or pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to STAY of all

further proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned

Proceedings issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide

U.C.NO.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03 dated 22.06.2024 and/or pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 maybe pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated at Sy.No.107/7 situated at

Suviseshapuram Area, Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation

limits and/or pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

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 maybe pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 hereinto process the Building Application via

APDMS Portal pursuant to the payment of application fee vide

B.A.No. 1064/0527/B/RJY/SSPRM/2023and/or pass s

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. Y NAGI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

2. GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following:

APHC010268782024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13251/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL

SECRETARYLELLA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMB I REDDY,

AGE- 57 YEARS,SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLE, ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH, S/O. LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS,YSRC

PARTY OFFICE KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. JAKKAMPUDI RAJA INDRA VANDITH,, S /O.LATE.

JAKKAMPUDI RAM MOHAN RAO, AGE- 35 YEARS, YSRC

PARTY OFFICE,KOTHAPETA, NH- 16, RAJANAGARAM,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNIC IPALADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND

UD)DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM MUN ICIPAL CORPORATION,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

A.P.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or

order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS6 declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3in

issuing the impugned Proceedings vide

U.C.No.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03 dated 22.06.2024 and

proposing to demolish the partially erected building structure

situated at Sy.No. 107/7 situated at Suviseshapuram Area,

Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation limits, as illegal.

Arbitrary, High- Handedness, Violative of Principles of natural

justice. Contrary to the provisions of A.P.Metropolitan Region and

Urban Development Authorities Act- 2016, A.P.Building Rules -

2017 and A.P.Municipal Corporation Act - 1955 apart from violation

of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and

Consequentially, to set-aside the impugned Proceedings issued by

the Respondent.No.3 vide U.C.No.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03

dated 22.06.2024and/or pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to STAY of all

further proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned

Proceedings issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide

U.C.NO.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCLE 03 dated 22.06.2024 and/or pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 maybe pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated at Sy.No.107/7 situated at

Suviseshapuram Area, Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation

limits and/or pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

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 maybe pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 hereinto process the Building Application via

APDMS Portal pursuant to the payment of application fee vide

B.A.No. 1064/0527/B/RJY/SSPRM/2023and/or pass s

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. Y NAGI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

2. GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following:

APHC010268802024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13253/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LEILA APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT DHARMANA

KRISHNA DAS, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM NAIDU, AGE-

ABOUT 58 YEARS,, YSRC PARTY OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM,

SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE- 57

YEARS, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE,

ANDHRA PRADESH 522501.

4. DHARMANA KRISHNA DAS,, S/O. LATE. RAMALINGAM

NAIDU, AGE- ABOUT 58 YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,

SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD)

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, SRIKAKULAM

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM

DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or

order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3 in issuing

the impugned Proceedings vide U.C.No.02/SEC40/2024/ZONE 01

dated 24.06.2024 and proposing to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated at Sy.No.44 of Peddapadu Village,

Srikakulam Urban in Srikakulam Municipal Corporation limits, as

illegal. Arbitrary, High-Handedness, Violative of Principles of natural

justice. Contrary to the provisions of A.P.Metropolitan Region and

Urban Development Authorities Act - 2016, A.P.Building Rules -

2017 and A.P.Municipal Corporation Act - 1955 apart from violation

of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and

Consequentially, to set- aside the impugned Proceedings issued by

the Respondent.No.3 vide U.C.NO.02/SEC40/2024/ZONE 01 dated

24.06.2024 and/or pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to STAY of all

further proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned

Proceedings issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide

U.C.NO.02/SEC40/2024/ZONE 01 dated 24.06.2024 and/or pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated at Sy.No.44 of Peddapadu Village,

Srikakulam Urban in Srikakulam Municipal Corporation limits and/or

pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, process the building application submitted

by the Petitioner through licensed technical personnel via APDMS

Portal along with application fee vide vide 1085/0178/SRI/PDU/20

23 on 02- 06-2024, immediately for the plan of construction pending

with the respondent authorities without notifying any contraventions

to the Petitioners in the partially erected building structure situated

at Sy.No.44 of Peddapadu Village, Srikakulam Urban in Srikakulam

Municipal Corporation limits and/or pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. TAGORE YADAV YARAGORLA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

2. GP FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following:

APHC010268832024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[0]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

WRIT PETITION NO: 13254/2024

Between:

1. YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETAIY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL

CHIEF SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP.

2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, ZONE- VII, GREATER

VISAKHAPATNAM CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...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 issuance of impugned demolition notice vide Notice-

e-offlce No.382347/ACP/Zone- VII/AKP dated 21.06.2024 is bad,

illegal, arbitrary, ultravirus, unconstitutional. colourable exercise of

power and contrary to the principles of natural justice and contrary

to the scheme of the APMC Act, 1955 and consequently set aside

the Notice-e-offlce No.382347/ACP/Zone-VII/AKP dated

21.06.2024 and and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay of all further

proceedings in connection with the impugned notice vide Notice-e-

office No.382347/ACP/Zone-VII/AKP dated 21.06.2024 pending

disposal of the above said writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V SURENDRA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010269592024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13272/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANASRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY,, A

RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY, OFFICE - PLOT NO. 13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501, REP. BY LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, 0PP. JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR- 522006

2. SITRASATHYANARAYANAMMA,, W/O SITRA RAMA

KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O H.NO.50 - 771 - A ,

DEVANAGAR, B CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGRESS PARTY DISTRICT

COMMITTEE, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPA RTMENT, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, N.R. PETA,

KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER.

3. KURNOOL URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUDA, .

A CAMP, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ more

particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, Declaring the

action of the Respondent No.2 herein in issuing a Provisional Order

vide Notice No.02/2024/WPRS - 30 dated I. 24.06.2024 and the

action of the Respondent No.3 herein in issuing Endorsement

bearing Letter No.EDS/1016/2023/1779 i dated 20.06.2024 and

the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the partially

erected structure that is situated in property to an extent of Ac.1.60

Cents in Sy.No.95/2 of Kurnool Village of Kurnool Urban Mandal,

as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, suffering from Non Application of

Mind, vitiated by mala fides, replete with ambiguity, violative of

Principles of Natural Justice and violative of Sections 452 and 461

of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and

violative of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan

Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016,

.Consequently set aside Notice No.02/2024/WPRS - 30 dated

24.06.2024 that is issued by the Respondent No.2 and

Endorsement bearing Letter No.EDS/1016/2023/1779 dated

20.06.2024 issued by Respondent No.3, Consequently direct the

Respondents herein to interfere with the possession and

occupation of the Petitioners over the property to an extent of

Ac.1.60 Cents in Sy.No.95/2 of Kurnool Village of Kurnool Urban

Mandal without following due procedure of law, And pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

Respondents herein to not interfere with the peaceful possession

and occupation of the Petitioners over the property to an extent of

Ac.1.60 Cents in Sy.No.95/2 of Kurnool Village of Kurnool Urban

Mandal and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of Notice

No.02/2024A/VP RS - 30 dated 24.06.2024 that is issued by the

Respondent No.2 and “ Endorsement bearing Letter

No.EDS/1016/2023/1779 dated 20.06.2024 issued by Respondent No.3

and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010269072024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13249/2024

Between:

1. YSR CONGRESS PARTY (NELLORE DISTRICT

COMMITTEE),, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT SY.NO. 2222- 2,

VENKATESWARAPURAM AREA, NELLORE BIT- II,

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SI GNATORY,

MR.LELLA APPI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORA TION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH

3. NELLORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY NUDA,

REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NELLORE, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...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 nature of Mandamus declaring

the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the show cause notice

vide U.C.NO.01/2024/NMC/WPRS-165 dated 22.06.2024 as illegal.

arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 3 00-A of the

Constitution of India, and in stark violation of the provisions of the

Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development

Authorities Act, 2016 and the Greater Hyderabad Municipal

Corporation Act, 1955 and to consequently set aside the same and

pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 direct the Respondents

not to take any coercive steps including demolition, against the

Petitioner’s office building located at Sy.No. 2222-2,

Venkateswarapuram Area, Nellore Bit- II,and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SHAGUFTA JAHAN NOOR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010271062024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13382/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEILA APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJUPETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. MAJJI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O NARASINGA RAO, AGED

ABOUT 42 YEARS. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA

SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O 8-18- 120,

PRADEEP NAGAR, NEAR CONSUMER COURT,

VIZIANAGARAM.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. VIZIANAGARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, VIZIANAGARAM.

...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 actions of the Respondents in issuing the provisional

order bearing Notice No.821/2024-G1, dated 24.6.2024 under

Section 452(1) AND 461(1) read with 428, 429 of the A.P.Municipal

Corporation Act, 1955 alleging that the building permission

application of the petitioner is pending and not resubmitted the

building application file rectifying the shortfalls raised by the

VMRDA, Visakhapatnam and directed the petitioner to stop the

construction as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Fundamental Rights

guaranteed under Article 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of

India contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Municipal Corporation

Act and the A.P.M.R AND U.D.A. Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) and

consequently set-aside the same and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay all further

proceedings pursuant to the provisional order bearing Notice

NO.821/2024-G1, dated 24.6.2024 issued by the 2ND respondent,

pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. J UGRANARASIMHA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010271582024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13389/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), PLOT NO.13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP,

TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRIET REP., BY ITS STATE

GENERAL SEERETARY AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,

LEILA APPI REDDY, S/O. LEILA SAMBI REDDY AGED

ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO.203, GOLDEN TOWERS,

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP- JUTE MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. G.SRIKANTH REDDY,, S/O. MOHAN REDDY, AGED

ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC- EX- MLA ., AND DISTRICT

PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS

PARTY (YSRCP) ANNAMAYA DISTRICT, RAYACHOTY,

OFFICE AT D.NO.37/4- 5, S.N.COLONY, RAYACHOTY,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILD INGS,

VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATHI.

2. THE KADAPA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,

KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT REP., BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN

3. VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI GRAMPANCHAYAT,

VARIGAREDDYGARI PALLI, RAYACHOTY MANDAL,

ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT REP., BY ITS PANCHAYAT

SECRETARY

...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 tot may be pleased to issue a Writ,

order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of

Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in trying to

pull down the construction raised by the petitioner in the land in an

extent of Ac.0.20 cents out Ac. 1.61 Cents in Sy.No.1022/2 of

Masapeta Village, Rayachoty Mandal, Annamayya District in

pursuance of the Provisional Order in Notice

No.Ol/VGP/RCT/KUDA/UC/2024, dated 25.06.2024 issued by him,

without considering the explanation, dated 26.06.2024 submitted by

the petitioner No.2 being the District President of the petitioner No.l

as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the provision of the Andhra Pradesh

Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016

and also the well established legal principles apart from being

violative of the fundamental and the Constitutional rights

guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of

the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent

No.2 not to proceed further inpursuance of the Provisional Order in

Notice No.Ol/VGP/RCT/KUDA/UC/2024, dated 25.06.2024 issued

by him without considering the explanation, dated 26.06.2024

submitted by the petitioner No.2 and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

respondent No.2 not to proceed further in pursuanceof the

Provisional Order in Notice No.Ol/VGP/RCT/KUDA/UC/2024, dated

25.06.2024 issued by him, pending disposal of the above Writ

Petition and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to direct the

respondent No.2 to consider the request of the petitioner No.l for

regularization of the building as is contemplated under Section 90-A

of the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban

Development Authorities Act, 2016, pending disposal of the above

Writ Petition and pas

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. V R REDDY KOVVURI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010271832024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13393/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, A

RECOGNIZED POLITICAL PARTY, OFFICE . PLOT NO.13,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLI. GUNTUR

DISTRICT, 522501. REP. BY LELLA APPI REDDY, S/O

LELLASAMBI REDDY, MLC, STATE GENERAL

SECRETARY AND CENTRAL OFFICE IN- CHARGE, AGED

ABOUT 56 YEAS S, R/O FLAT NO. 203, GOLDEN TOWERS.

KRISHNA NAGAR MAIN ROAD, OPP. JUT E MILL, KRISHNA

NAGAR. GUNTUR- 522006

2. VEMPALLI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O V.SURYANARAYANA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. R/O DOOR NO.11 - 63 - 63,

BRAMHMIN STREET, NEAR RAM MANDIR,

MALLIKARJUNA PETA, VIJAYAWADA. KRISHNA

DISTRICT. DISTRICT PRESIDENT, Y.S.R. CONGR ESS

PARTY DISTRICT COMMITTEE, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI.

AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. VIJAYAWADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, . VIJAYAWADA

CITY, KRISHNA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER

...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 more

particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, Declaring the

action of the Respondent No.2 herein in issuing a Notice under

Section 452 of the GHMC Act, 1955 vide Rc.G5 dated 24.06.2024

and in threatening to demolish the structures raised in Ac.1.10

Cents in R.S.Nos.23 - 2, 27 - 1 and 27 - 3 in Labour Colony,

Vidyadharapuram Village, Vijayawada West Mandal as being illegal,

arbitrary, unjust, violative of the provisions of the GHMC Act

Consequently set aside the Notice under Section 452 of the GHMC

Act, 1955 vide Rc.G5 dated 24.06.2024 that is issued by the

Respondent No.2 Consequently direct the Respondents herein to

interfere with the possession and occupation of the Petitioners over

the property to an extent of Ac.1.10 Cents in R.S.Nos.23 - 2, 27 - 1

and 27 - 3 in Labour Colony, Vidyadharapuram Village, Vijayawada

West Mandal without following due procedure of law And pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 direct the Respondents

herein to not interfere with the peaceful possession and occupation

of the Petitioners over the property to an extent of Ac.1.10 Cents in

R.S.Nos.23 — 2, 27 — 'I and 27 — 3 in Labour Colony,

Vidyadharapuram Village, Vijayawada West Mandal and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 suspend the operation of

the Notice under Section 452 of the GHMC Act, 1955 vide Rc.G5

dated 24.06.2024 issued by Respondent No.2 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010271632024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13396/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 5 7 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT,

PERNI VENKATA RAMAIAH NANI, AGE 57 YEARS,

R/O.23/346, RAMANAIDUPETA, MACHILIPATNAM,

KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA

DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE MACHILIPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP

BY ITS COMMISSIONER, MACHILIPATNAM

KRISHNADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. THE MACHILIPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY, REP BY ITS VIC E CHAIRMAN,

MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...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 or order or

direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3 in

issuing the impugned Proceedings vide Roc.No.2482/2024/G2

dated 26.06.2024 and proposing to demolish the erected building

structure situated at R.S.No.371-A1, S.W.No.lV situated at Edepalli

area, Machilipatnam Town within the Machilipatnam Municipal

Corporation limits, as illegal, manifestly arbitrary, without jurisdiction,

unreasonable, irrational, perverse, High-Handedness, whimsical,

capricious. Contrary to the provisions of A. P.Metropolitan Region

and Urban Development Authorities Act - 2016, A.P.Building Rules

- 2017 and A.P.Municipal Corporation Act - 1955, unconstitutional

besides being violative of Principles of Natural Justice besides

being opposed to the very spirit and object of Justice and Fair-play

and Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19, 21 and

300A of the Constitution of India and Consequentially, to set-aside

the impugned Proceedings issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide

Roc.No.2482/2024/G2 dated 26.06.2024

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 STAY of all further

proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned Proceedings

issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide Roc.No.2482/2024/G2 dated

26.06.2024

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the erected building

structure situated at R.S.No.371-A1, S.W.No.lV situated at Edepalli

area, Machilipatnam Town within the Machilipatnam Municipal

Corporation limits

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. Y NAGI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010271892024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13397/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY

LELLAAPPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH 522501.

2. YUVAJANASHRAMIKARYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP.BY. ITS KATASANI RAM BHUPAL REDDY,

S/O. KATASANINARASIMHA REDDY, AGE ABOUT64

YEARS, YSRC PARTY OFFICE,NANDYALA,

NANDYALADISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MAANDUD) DEPARTMEN T,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

NANDYALA, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. NANDYALA MUNICIPALITY, REP BY ITS.. THE MUNICIPAL

COMMISSIONER, NANDYALA, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH

...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 or order or

direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3 in

issuing the impugned Proceedings vide U.C.No.01/WPRS 37/2024

dated 25.06.2024 and proposing to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated in Sy.No.504/2 to an extent of Ac. 1.15

Cents of Mulasagaram. Nandyala Urban in Nandyala District, as

illegal. Arbitrary, High-Handedness, Violative of Principles of natural

justice. Contrary to the provisions of A.P.Metropolitan Region and

Urban Development Authorities Act - 2016, A.P.Building Rules -

2017 and AP Municipalities Act, 1965 apart from violation of

Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and

Consequentially, to set-aside the impugned Proceedings issued by

the Respondent.No.3 vide U.C.No.01/WPRS 37/2024 dated

25.06.2024and/ or pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 STAY of all further

proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned Proceedings

issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide U.C.N0.01/WPRS 37/2024

dated 25.06.2024 and/or pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the partially erected

building structure situated in Sy.No.504/2 to an extent of Ac. 1.15

Cents of Mulasagaram, Nandyala Urban in Nandyala District and/or

pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. NAIDU SIVA RAMA KRISHNA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010271772024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13408/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANASHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REP.BY.STATE GENERAL SECRETARY, LEILA

APPI REDDY S/O. L.SAMBI REDDY, AGE 57 YEARS,

SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP, TADEPALLE, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522501.

2. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP),, REP BY ITS.. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT, ALLA

KALI KRISHNA SRINIVAS, C/O. ALLA SURYA CHANDRA

RAO (LATE), AGE 55 YEARS,R/O.11- 70/2,SRI RAM

NAGAR, 11TH ROAD, ALLA NANI GARI

HOUSE,SANIVARAPU PETA, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 534003.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (MA AND UD) DEPARTMENT

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS

COMMISSIONER, ELURU, ELURUDISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP BY

ITS VICE CHAIRMAN, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH.

...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 or order or

direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF

MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent.No.3 in

issuing the impugned Proceedings vide

Notice.No.01/SEC19/ELR/UC/2024 dated 24.06.2024 and

proposing to demolish the erected building structure situated at

Sy.No.660/P, Eluru Urban Area situated at ASR Stadium, Opposite

Main Railway Station Area within the Eluru Municipal Corporation

limits, as illegal, manifestly arbitrary, without jurisdiction,

unreasonable, irrational, perverse, High- Handedness, whimsical,

capricious. Contrary to the provisions of A.P.Metropolitan Region

and Urban Development Authorities Act - 2016, A.P.Building Rules

- 2017 and A.P.Municipal Corporation Act - 1955, unconstitutional

besides being violative of Principles of Natural Justice besides

being opposed to the very spirit and object of Justice and Fair-play

and Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19, 21 and

300Aof the Constitution of India and Consequentially, to set-aside

the impugned Proceedings issued by the Respondent.No.3 vide

Notice.No.01/SEC19/ELR/UC/2024 dated 24.06.2024

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 STAY of all further

proceedings pursuant to the issuance of the impugned Proceedings

issued by the Respondent.No.3

videNotice.No.01/SEC19/ELR/UC/2024 dated 24.06.2024

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 direct the

Respondent.No.3 herein, not to demolish the erected building

structure situated at Sy.No.660/P, Eluru Urban Area situated at

ASR Stadium, Opposite Main Railway Station Area within the Eluru

Municipal Corporation limits and/or pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. Y NAGI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

The Court made the following:

APHC010272092024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13410/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SHRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LELLA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

SRI.PARIKSHIT RAJU PARVATIPURAM

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRI NCIPAL

SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATI.

2. THE PARVATHIPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY

ITS COMMISSIONER PARVATHIPURAM

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ order

or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus

declaring the actions of the Respondents in issuing show cause

notice bearing No. 28/1091/PVP/UC/2024 dated June 25, 2024

under Section 228 (1 and 2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP

Municipalities Act, 1965 and Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90

(1) of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) alleging that the

YSR Congress Party Office situated at ChakaliBegalam Street,

Ward 16 Area, Parvathipuram which is under construction is

constructed deviating the municipal laws and sought for sufficient

cause as to why the unauthorised construction should not be

removed / altered or pulled down within 7 days from the date of

receipt of the said show cause notice as illegal, arbitrary and

violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19, 21 and

300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to declare the

proceedings initiated by the Respondent under Section 228 (1 and

2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP Municipalities Act, 1965 and

Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA Act

2016 (Act 5 of 2016)as invalid, illegal and arbitrary and accordingly

set aside the same and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 may be pleased to stay all further

proceedings on the Respondent No. 2’s show cadse notice bearing

No. 28/1091/PVPAJC/2024 dated June 25, 2024 under Section 228

(1&2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP Municipalities Act, 1965 and

Section 89 (1 & 2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA Act

2016 (Act 5 of 2016).

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. R YELLA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010272102024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13412/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY

SRI. LEILA APPI REDDY S/O SAMBI REDDY OFFICE AT

PLOT NO. 13, SURYADEVARA TOWNSHIP TADEPALLI,

GUNTUR - 522501

2. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY

(YSRCP), REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT PRESIDENT

SRI. MOPIDEVI VENKATA RAMANA RAO BAPATLA

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. THE BAPATLA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS

COMMISSIONER BAPATLA

...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 actions of the Respondents in issuing show cause

notice bearing No. 15/1019/BPT/UC/2024 dated June 24, 2024

under Section 228 (1 and 2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP

Municipalities Act, 1965 and Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90

(1) of AP MR and UDA Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) alleging that the

YSR Congress Party Office situated at Vidyanagar Street,

Vidyanagar Area, Bapatla which is under construction is

constructed deviating the municipal laws and sought for sufficient

cause as to why the unauthorised construction should not be

removed / altered or pulled down within 7 days from the date of

receipt of the said show cause notice as illegal, arbitrary and

violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19, 21

and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to declare

the proceedings initiated by the Respondent under Section 228 (1

and 2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP Municipalities Act, 1965

and Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA

Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) as invalid, illegal and arbitrary and

accordingly set aside the same and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay all further

proceedings on Respondent No. 2’s show cause notice bearing No.

15/1019/BPT/UC/2024 dated June 24, 2024 issued under Section

228 (1&2) read with 209 and 212 of the AP Municipalities Act, 1965

and Section 89 (1 and 2) read with 82, 90 (1) of AP MR and UDA

Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. R YELLA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010273432024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13540/2024

Between:

1. YSR CONGRESS PARTY, REP. BY ITS GENERAL

SECRETARY LEILA APPLI REDDY

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL

ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY

ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

BHIMAVARAM.

4. THE ELURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, (EUDA)

REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON/ CHAIRMAN,

CHANDRAGUPTA COLONY, LUNANI NAGAR, ELURU,

SANIVARAPUPETA, ANDHRA PRADESH-534002.

5. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BHIMAVARAM,

WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

6. THE TAHSILDAR, UNDI MAN DAL, WEST GODAVARI

DISTRICT.

7. THE NRP AGRAHARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, IS

REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, UNDI

MANDAL, 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 issuance of notice on the nomenclature of Provisional

Order viz.. Illegal Construction No.02-2024 dated 25.06.2024 by an

incompetent 7th respondent usurping the powers of the 4th

respondent herein is bad, illegal, arbitrary, ultravirus,

unconstitutional, colourable exercise of power and contrary to the

principles of natural justice and contrary to the scheme of the

Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development

Authorities Act, 2016 and consequently set aside the notice viz.

Provisional Order vide Illegal Construction No.02-2024 dated

25.06.2024 and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay of all further

proceedings in connection with the impugned notice viz.. provisional

Order vide Illegal Construction No.02-2024 dated 25.06.2024 as

issued by the 7th respondent usurping the powers of the 4th

respondent pending disposal of the above said writ petition and

pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V SURENDRA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

APHC010274382024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3233]

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION NO: 13557/2024

Between:

1. YUVAJANA SRAMIKA RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, REP.

BY ITS STATE GENERAL SECRETARY SRI LEILA APPI

REDDY, T.S.NO.569, MAHARAJU PETA SOUTH WARD,

VIZIANAGARAM.

2. GOPIREDDY SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O VENKATESWARA

REDDY DISTRICT PRESIDENT, YUVAJANA SRAMIKA

RYTHU CONGRESS PARTY, R/O NARASARAOPET,

PALNADU DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

2. PALNADU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REP. BY

ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,

NARASARAOPET.

...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 2nd respondent in issuing the provisional

order bearing Notice No.003/PAUDA/UC/2024, dated 24.6.2024

under Section 89(1 ) and (2) r/w Sections 82, 84, 90(1) of

A.P.Metropolita n Region and Urban Development Authority Act,

2016 to remove the construction of the petitioners building situate in

Block No.15-10-A, Lingamguntia Agraharam, Narasaraopet

Mandal, Palnadu District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of

Articles 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India contrary to the

provisions of the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act and the A.P.M.R

and U.D.A. Act 2016 (Act 5 of 2016) and consequently set-aside

the same and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 stay all further

proceedings pursuant to the provisional order bearing Notice

NO.003/PAUDA/UC/2024, dated 24.6.2024 including demolition of

the petitioners’ building situate in Block No.15-10-A, Lingamguntia

Agraharam, Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District, pending

disposal of the writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. J UGRANARASIMHA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER

W.P.No.13258 of 2024

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents

in proposing/proceeding to demolish the building of the petitioners in the

land to an extent of Ac.1-50 cents in Survey No.136-1B1B2A2,

HLC Colony, Anantapur under the guise of the Provisional Order vide

Notice No.01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 and Provisional

Order vide U.C. Notice No.02/2024/AHUDA dated 22.06.2024 even

without passing the confirmation order as stipulated under the Andhra

Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and Andhra Pradesh

Metropolitan Region & Urban Development Authority Act, 2016.

2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the first

petitioner is a regional political party in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

It had achieved a remarkable victory in the 2019 Andhra Pradesh

Legislative Assembly Elections by winning 151 seats out of 175 and it was

in power for five years. While so as per the policy of the Government of

Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.340 Revenue (Assn.I) Department dated

21.07.2016 in respect of allotment of government land for locating the

offices of the national political parties/recognised political parties,

the petitioner’s political party was allotted the subject land vide

G.O.Ms.No.371 dated 18.05.2022. The possession handed over certificate

was also issued by the Tahsildar, Anantapuram in Rc.No.8/1267/2022/B,

dated NIL.12.2022. As per the policy of the State the lease is for a period

of 33 years and as per the conditions of the said policy the allottee shall

commence and complete the construction of the building on the land within

one year from the date of issue of the allotment orders. Pursuant to the

handing over of the possession of the subject land, the petitioners also paid

property tax for the open land. Then the petitioners submitted building

application form to the respondent No.5 vide B.A.No.1107/0084/B/ATP/

ATPRRL/2023 dated 12.10.2023 and in pursuance of the same,

the respondent authorities inspected the said land and on comparison of the

site measurements and the proposed plan, they have affirmatively stated

that the building plan is approved and that the construction work can be

commenced. In spite of repeated requests the copy of approval was not

made available to the petitioners. Subsequently after lapse of three months

the petitioners had commenced the construction and even during the

construction time there were periodical inspections by the respondent

authorities concerned. The respondent authorities further stated to the

petitioners that the building approval is deemed to have been approved as

per Section 84(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region & Urban

Development Authorities Act, 2016 (for short, “APMRUDA Act”) as the

stipulated period of 60 days has elapsed. The said construction of the

subject building took place by carrying out the same strictly as per law and

in strict compliance with the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017.

While so, suddenly after the defeat of the petitioner’s political party

in the General Elections, 2024, and upon the change of circumstances,

to the utter surprise and shock of the petitioners the respondent No.4 of the

respondent No.3-Corporation issued provisional order under Sections

452(1) and 461(1) of APMC Act, 1955 and under Sections 89(1 & 2) r/w

Sections 82 and 90 (1) of APMRUDA Act, 2016 in Notice

No.01/1001/ATP/UC/TP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 calling upon the

petitioners to show sufficient cause as to why the unauthorised

construction should not be removed/altered or pulled down within seven

days from the date of receipt of the said notice. Similarly, the respondent

No.6 representing the office of the respondent No.5 also issued similar

provisional order notice under Sections 84(5), 88, 89(1), (2), 90 and 91 of

APMRUDA Act, 2016 in U.C.Notice No.02/2024/AHUDA dated

22.06.2024 calling upon the petitioners to show sufficient cause as to why

the deviation/violation of the construction should not be removed/altered or

pulled down within seven days from the date of receipt of the said notice.

Immediately, the petitioners submitted the explanation to the respondent

authorities vide letters dated 25.06.2024 in pursuance of the above said

impugned provisional orders dated 22.06.2024. Consequently,

the petitioners also stopped the further construction of the building in the

said land with effect from the date of receipt of the said impugned notice

and even till date they have not commenced the work. But the respondent

authorities in similar circumstances have high handedly and in an arbitrary

manner demolished a similar building in Tadepalli in the early hours on

22.06.2024 and the opposite party cadre is threatening that all the party

offices will be demolished in a similar fashion. While so, few people

claiming to be acting under the instructions of the respondent authorities

had entered into the said lands in the early hours of 22.06.2024 and

threatened that they would be demolishing the building and also warned

not to interfere with the demolition activity as it may cause a threat to the

life. In view of the said reasonable apprehension of threat of demolition,

this writ petition is filed assailing the above said impugned provisional

orders dated 22.06.2024.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per Section

428 of the A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, (for short, “the Act”)

the above said building application was made duly complying with all the

requirements and the respondent Commissioner concerned has not

disapproved the construction of the said building by communicating the

same in writing within thirty days of the receipt of the above said building

application and plans as per Section 437 of the said Act. Hence it is

deemed to have been approved by him. The Commissioner also has got the

power to regularise the construction made without obtaining sanction plan

subject to fulfilling the following conditions as per Section 455A of the

said Act.

“455-A. Regulation of Buildings constructed without sanctioned plan: -

The commissioner may regularize constructions made without obtaining

sanctioned plan, subject to fulfilling the following conditions:

(a) Submission of building plans to the competent authority duly paying

all categories of fee and charges;

(b) The construction shall be subject to the condition that all parameters

laid down in relevant statutes, Master Plan, Zonal Development Plan,

Building Bye-Laws, Building Rules and other relevant Government

orders including Andhra Pradesh Fire Service Act5, 1999 and the

National Building Code are satisfied;

various categories of fees and charges payable by the applicant for

obtaining building permission in addition to the regular fee and other

charges payable.”

4. The Municipal Commissioner has also got power under Section

455AA of the said Act even to regularise and penalise the construction of

the buildings made by the owner unauthorisedly or any deviation of the

sanction plan as a onetime measure as detailed in the said section.

5. Similarly, as per Section 84 of the APMRUDA Act,

the petitioners made application for permission to construct the subject

building as stated above and no refusal to grant of permission in writing

was received by the petitioners from the respondent authorities concerned

within sixty days from the date of receipt of the said application of the

petitioners. In view of the deeming provision of Section 84(4) of the said

Act, the permission is deemed to have been granted for the construction of

the said building by the respondent authority concerned. But surprisingly

under Section 89 of the said Act the respondent authorities concerned

issued the above said impugned provisional order and without following

the further procedure as contemplated in the said section and other

provisions of those two acts, the respondent authorities are bent upon

hastenly to demolish the subject building even without considering the

explanation submitted by the petitioners as stated above. The confirmation

order is also not yet passed by the said respondent authority under Section

89(3) of the said Act. Even after that the petitioners have got the right of

remedy of appeal under Section 89(2) of the said Act. Section 90A of the

said Act deals with Resolution and regulation and penalisation of the

buildings constructed without sanction plans. Without availing and

exhausting all the remedies, the respondent authorities are threatening to

demolish the subject building contrary to the provisions of law.

6. He further refers to the observation made by the learned Single

Judge of this Court in W.P.No.25816 of 2022 dated 16.08.2022 at

paragraph 15, which reads as follows:

“15.Whether the deviation in the present case, as per the

provisional order are minor, minimal or trivial, or affect public at large

or in public interest or not, or cause public nuisance or hazardous or

dangerous to public safety including of the residents therein require

consideration by the competent authority of the Corporation before

resorting to the demolition. In the Full Bench judgment Section 452 of

the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act itself was for consideration.”

7. He also refers to the Full Bench decision of the erstwhile High

Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P.No.10019 of 1993 dated

02.09.1994 in the matter of 3 ACES HYDERABAD VS. MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD

, wherein it was held as under:

“27. Point No. 4: This point relates to the power to

demolition under S. 452 of "The Act". The contention of the

petitioner is that the demolition contemplated under Sec. 452 of

"The Act" is not a mandatory one. The power of demolition

should not be resorted to unless overwhelming public interest is

involved. We have already referred to the Judgment of the

Supreme Court in Prathiba

28. ...

29. Now, the other point which remains to be dealt with is

whether the case of Shamsuddin Hasan Khudankmen (1978 (2)

Andh WR 91) (supra) which construed the word "may" occurring

in Section 452 of "The Act" is rightly decided or not. The learned

Judges in the said Judgment held that the word "may" occurring in

Section 452 of "The Act" is not mandatory, in the sense that the

Commissioner is not bound to direct demolition of the building

under the said section in every case of violation. In coming to the

said conclusion, the learned Judges relied upon and followed the

two-Judge Bench Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in

Calcutta Corporation v. Mulchand, AIR 1956 SC 110.

AIR 1995 AP 17

30 to 35. ...

36. Having regard to the rampant, illegal and unauthorised

constructions raised in the country as observed in State of

Maharashtra's case (AIR 1991 SC 1453) (supra) before parting

with this case, we would like to formulate the following guidelines

to be followed by the respondent in respect of illegal

constructions. The guidelines should not be treated as exhaustive

but only illustrative and the discretion to be exercised by the

Corporation in any given case should not be arbitrary or

capricious.

1) In cases where applications having been duly filed in

accordance with law, after fulfilling all requirements, seeking

permission to construct buildings and permission was, also

granted by the Corporation, the power of demolition should be

exercised by the Corporation only if the deviations made during

the construction are not in public interest or cause public nuisance

or hazardous or dangerous to public safety including the residents

therein. If the deviations of violations are minor, minimal or trivial

which do not affect public at large, the Corporation will not resort

to demolition.”

8. Relying upon the same, the learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that the power of demolition should not be resorted to unless

overwhelming public interest is involved. In view of the above said

guidelines as mentioned in para 36(1) of the above said judgment, if the

deviations of violations are minor, minimal or trivial which do not affect

public at large, the Corporation will not resort to demolition. Finally he

submits that since the above said construction of the subject building has

been carried out till now as per the submitted plans and as per the

provisions of the above said two Acts and Rules made thereunder, the

question of demolition of any portion of the said buildings will not arise in

this case.

W.P.No.13240 of 2024:

9. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

No.2 in trying to pull down the construction raised by the petitioner in the

land in an extent of Ac.0-24 cents out of Ac.2-00 cents in Survey

No.424/3 of Kadapa Village and Mandal, YSR District, (Plot No.38/240-

65, Ramanajaneyapuram Street, Ramanjaneyapuram) in pursuance of the

Notice No.376/1013/KDP/2024 dated 22.06.2024 without considering the

explanation dated 29.06.2024 submitted by the petitioner.

10. The counsel for the petitioner submits that vide G.O.MS.No.758

dated 20.12.2022 the Government of Andhra Pradesh allotted the subject

land in an extent of Ac.2-00 in Survey No.424/3 in Kadapa Village and

Mandal, YSR District in favour of YSR Congress party for construction of

party office buildings on lease basis for a period of 33 years on payment of

Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340 Revenue

(Assn-I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions.

The possession of the subject land was delivered by the Tahsildar, Kadapa

vide certificate for handing over of possession of land dated 31.01.2023.

The petitioner paid the property tax for the open land. While so,

the construction of the subject building has been undertaken and almost it

is completed as per the plans and in compliance of the provisions of the

A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the AP MRUDA Act, 2016 and the

Rules made thereunder. While so, to the utter surprise and shock and

dismay of the petitioner, the respondent No.2 issued the impugned

provisional order dated 22.06.2024 for which the petitioner submitted its

explanation dated 25.06.2024. He further submits that pursuant to the

allotment of the land the party incharge tried to submit the building

application through the licensed technical personnel via the APDMS portal

whereas the said application was not received stating that the subject land

has not been converted into non agriculture from agriculture even though

no such conversion is required. Petitioner apprehends the threat of

demolition of the subject building at any time unless the protection is given

in the interest of justice.

W.P.No.13212 of 2024:

11. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

Nos.2 and 3 in attempting to demolish or seize the building in an extent of

294.66 square yards consisting of ground+3 floors RCC Building, situated

in D.No.21-114, Plot No.7, survey Nos.83/2, 85/1, 86, 87/A1, 87/A2,

87/A3 & 89 of Vengalapuram Village, Adoni Mandal, Kurnool District.

12. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner leased out

the subject building to the YSR Congress party to use it as its office.

The respondent Nos.2 and 3 issued the impugned provisional order dated

25.06.2024 alleging unatuhorised construction in the premises of

D.No./Plot No.21-114 situated at SKD Colony Street, SKD Colony,

road area as detailed in the said order for which the petitioner submitted

explanation on 27.06.2024. He also further submits that the Commissioner,

Adoni Municipality has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice.

The petitioner apprehends threat of demolition by the respondent

authorities concerned without giving any due opportunity.

W.P.No.13244 of 2024: -

13. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

Nos.2 and 3 in issuing the confirmation order vide

U.C.No.06/1155/PTP/UC/2023 dated 24.06.2024 alleging unauthorized

construction in Survey No.666/6A1, 666/7A1 of Puttaparthi Revenue

Village situated Near Airport.

14. In this case also the Government of Andhra Pradesh allotted the

subject land in an extent of Ac.2-00 i.e., Ac.1-30 cents in Survey

No.666/6A1, 666/7A1 of Puttaparthi Revenue village and Mandal in Satya

Sai District in favour of the petitioner’s party for construction of party

office buildings on lease basis on payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre per

annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated

21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions. The possession was handed over

by the Tahsildar, Puttaparthi vide proceedings dated 05.12.2022.

The petitioners paid the property tax for the open land and the petitioners

submitted building application form to the Puttaparthi Urban Development

Authority vide B.A.No.1169/0014/PTP/PTP/2023 dated 06.09.2023.

Accordingly as per the plans submitted and in consonance with the

provisions of the law, the petitioner constructed the subject building

without there being any deviations and it is at the stage of completion.

While so, hurriedly, the respondent nos.2 and 3 issued the above said

confirmation orders dated 22.06.2024 without applying its mind posing

threat of demolition at any time.

W.P.No.13248 of 2024: -

15. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 Municipal Corporation dated 22.06.2024 on the

ground of alleged unauthorized construction as detailed in the table of the

said proceedings.

16. In this case also the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide

G.O.Ms.No.355, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022 allotted

the subject land in an extent of Ac.2-00 cents in T.S.No.155-2-7B at

Ramanayyapeta village, Kakinada Urban Mandal, Kakinada District in

favour of YSR Congress Party for construction of party office buildings on

lease basis for a period of 33 years on payment of Rs.1,000/- per anum per

acre in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated

21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, the possession was

delivered by the Tahsildar, Kakinada Urban vide proceedings dated

26.05.2022. The petitioner paid property tax on the open land also.

The petitioner submitted Building Application form to the respondent

Corporation vide B.A.No. 1060/0350/B/KKD/RM1/2023 dated

25.07.2023. Accordingly, the construction of the petitioners’party office

building has been carried out strictly in compliance with the provisions of

law under the APMRUDA Act, 2016, the A.P. Municipal Corporation Act,

1955 and the A.P.Building Rules, 2017. While so, to the utter surprise and

shock of the petitioners, the above said impugned provisional order dated

22.06.2024 was issued by the respondent No.2 herein for which the

petitioner submitted explanation dated 25.06.2024. Without considering

the same, the respondent No.2 may cause for demolition of the subject

building at any point of time.

W.P.No.13250 of 2024: -

17. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

No.2 in issuing the show cause notice No.E-382346/2024/ACP-II dated

21.06.2024 and also stop work order letter No.SWO/1167/2023/0102 dated

21.06.2024 issued by the respondent No.4.

18. In this case also the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

subject land was allotted in an extent of Ac.2-00 cents in Survey No.174/4,

Yendada Village, Ward No.8, Zone-II, GVMC Limits, in favour of the

petitioners’ party for construction of party office building for a period of

33 years in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated

21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, the Tahsildar,

Visakhapatnam also issued delivery receipt with regard to the possession

of the subject land vide proceedings dated 14.06.2022. The petitioners paid

property tax on the open land. Subsequently, the petitioners were issued

building permit order on the application made by the petitioners dated

03.02.2023 vide Permit No.1167/0010/B/VSKP/YND and MWD/2023

dated 20.06.2024. The construction of the party office building has been

carried out strictly in compliance with the provisos of law including the

APMRUDA Act, 2016, the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, and the

A.P.Building Rules, 2017. While so, to the utter surprise shock and dismay

of the petitioners the respondent authorities issued the above said

impugned notice through the Town Planning Officer, Zone-II of the

respondent No.2 and the stop work order of the respondent No.4 was

issued by the Chief Urban Planner of the Visakhapatnam Metropolitan

Region Development Authority, dated 21.06.2024 for which the petitioner

submitted the explanation dated 25.06.2024 to both the authorities.

Without considering the same, the authorities may proceed with the

demolition of the subject building without giving any opportunity to the

petitioners.

W.P.No.13251 of 2024: -

19. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order of the

respondent No.3 vide U.C.No.02/SEC09/2024/CIRCULE 03 dated

22.06.2024 and proposing to demolish the partially erected building

structure situated at Survey No.107/7 situated at Suviseshapuram Area,

Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation Limits.

20. In this case also the petitioners refers to the proceedings of the

respondent No.2, dated 20.02.2023, G.O.Ms.No.357, Revenue (Lands.I)

Department, dated 18.05.2022, G.O.Ms.No.53, Revenue (Lands.I)

Department, dated 16.02.2023, Land handing over certificate of the

Tahsildar, Rajahmundry, dated 07.06.2024 and the explanation submitted

by the petitioner, dated 25.06.2024 to the respondent No.3.

21. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners paid the

property tax on the land. He further submits that in spite of the orders of

this court in W.P.No.12814 of 2024 dated 21.06.2024 the respondent

authorities therein demolished on the same day the subject building therein

in utter violation of the said orders of this court. Hence apprehends threat

of demolition of the subject land of this writ petition also at any time

without considering the explanation of the petitioners herein.

W.P.No.13253 of 2024: -

22. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent

NO.3 in issuing the Provisional Order vide U.C.No.01/SEC40/2024/ZONE

01 dated 24.06.2024. In this case also the petitioners refers to the

possession handing over certificate dated 31.12.2022, the G.O.Ms.No.349,

Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022 of the Government of

Andhra Pradesh, the land property tax receipts with assessment

No.1085044080 paid from 01.10.2022 to 31.03.2025 and the explanation

of the petitioners to the respondent No.3 dated 25.06.2024. Pursuant to the

allotment of the land, the party incharge duly submitted Building

Application No.1085/0175/SRI/PDU/2023 dated 02.06.2024. The Building

designs were approved but the town planning fee was yet to be generated.

The authorities have visited the site and satisfied with the compliance of

the plan with site. The construction work was started much after the expiry

of the time specified under Section 437 of the Act and Section 84(4) of the

APMRUDA Act, 2016. However, upon receipt of the subject notice,

construction work was put on hold.

23. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the Section 451 of the

Act has no application for the facts and circumstances of this case.

W.P.No.13254 of 2024: -

24. This writ petition is filed questioning the impugned demolition

notice issued by the respondent no.3 for the respondent No.2 vide notice

E-Office No.382347/ACP/Zone-VII/AKP dated 21.06.2024 on the ground

that the petitioner has constructed the building without obtaining

permission from the GVMC Authorities and thereby directed to show

cause in writing by further directing to stop the work and to submit the

reply within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice, for which the

petitioner submitted its explanation dated 25.06.2024.

25. The petitioner also refers to the G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I)

Department, dated 21.07.2016, G.O.Ms.No.759, Revenue (Assn.I)

Department, dated 20.12.2022. The proceedings of the Tahsildar,

Anakapalli District dated 29.12.2022, the handing over certificate issued

by the Tahsildar dated 29.12.2022 and the GVMC Anakapalli, Zone VII

Receipt Nos.06/2024-25/7108, 07/2023-24/11471, 03/2022-23/25582.

i.e., Property tax paid receipts. He further submits that the impugned notice

does not fit into the scheme of the A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955.

W.P.No.13272 of 2024: -

26. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 Corporation vide Notice No.02.2024/WPRS-30 dated

24.06.2024 and the short fall notice issued by the respondent No.3 vide

endorsement letter No.EDS/1016.2023/1779 dated 20.06.2024 for which

the petitioner submitted explanation dated 26.06.2024.

27. He also refers to the G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I),

dated 21.07.2016, G.O.Ms.No.373, Revenue (Lands.I) Department,

dated 18.05.2022, G.O.Ms.No.55, Revenue (Lands.I) dated 06.02.2023,

proceedings of the Collector and District Magistrate dated 29.04.2023,

handing over possession of the land by the Tahsildar, Kurnool dated

01.05.2023 and the Mortgage Deed dated 15.09.2023 vide document

No.12581 of 2023. He further submits that the respondent authorities have

not applied their mind, impugned proceedings are in violation of principles

of natural justice and the respondent No.3’s letter dated 22.06.2024 is not

supplied to the petitioner.

W.P.No.13249 of 2024: -

28. This writ petition is filed questioning the notice issued by the

respondent No.2 vide U.C.No.01/2024/NMC/WPRS-165 dated 22.06.2024

alleging that the petitioner has been constructing ground + one floor

unauthorisedly at Venkateswarapuram area in Survey No.2222-2 of

Nellore Bit-II without obtaining prior building permission from the

respondent Nos.2 and 3 for which the petitioner submitted explanation

dated 25.06.2024 to the respondent No.2. He also refers to the

G.O.Ms.No.366, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022,

possession handed over certificate issued by the Tahsildar dated

08.12.2022 and the Nellore Municipal Corporation Receipts showing the

payment of property tax through online. He further submits that the

building applications made vide B.A.No.1031/0263/B/NMC/VSTA/2023

dated 13.02.2023. Accordingly, the construction of the subject building

was taken up in compliance with the provisions of the Act without

deviating the submitted plans.

W.P.No.13382 of 2024: -

29. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2-Municipal Corporation directing the petitioner to stop

the unauthorised construction work and submit a reply to the notice within

seven days from the date of receipt of the same.

30. The impugned provisional order says that the petitioner aplied for

the building permission in the T.S.No.569P of Maharajupeta North ward,

Jammu Narayanapuram, Vizianagaram, which is pending in the Licensed

Technical Personnel (LTP) login nearly 347 days and not resubmitted the

Building Application file duly rectifying shortfalls raised by the competent

authority i.e., VMRDA, Visakhapatnam. It is also observed that the

petitioner has proceeded with the construction work without obtaining

permission from the VMRDA.

31. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned provisional

order of the respondent No.2 dated 24.06.2024 is liable to be set aside as

the short falls pointed out by the respondent No.2 in the said proceedings

are not applicable and even then when the explanation was submitted to the

said provisional order dated 24.06.2024, the same was not accepted by the

respondent No.2 through online procedure. However, he refers to the

G.O.Ms.No.350, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022 issuing

allotment of land to an extent of Ac.1-00 in T.S.No.559 at Maharajupeta

Southward, Vizianagaram Municipal Corporation, Vizianagaram District

in favour of the petitioners party for construction of party office buildings

on lease basis @ the rate of Rs.1,000/- per acre per anum in terms of

G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject

to certain conditions. Consequently, the possession of the subject land was

handed over by the Tahsildar vide proceedings dated 23.06.2024.

The petitioner also paid property tax on the open land. The VMRDA issued

endorsement dated 12.07.2023 showing certain shortfall of non submission

of three documents which have no application and not required for the

purpose of undertaking construction of the said building over the subject

land. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the decision of this

court in W.P.No.17688 and 26474 of 2021 dated 05.08.2022 wherein it

was observed at paragraphs 33 and 34 as under:

“33. The learned Single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of

A.P. in its order dated 06.06.2012 in W.P.No.23934 of 2009 had held

that the petitioner, in that case, shall be entitled to file an application

under Section 455-A of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act for

regularisation of construction. In the present case, a similar provision is

available to the petitioner under Section 90-A of the A.P. Metropolitan

Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016, which

empowers the Metropolitan Commissioner or Vice Chairman to

regularise constructions made without building permissions, subject to

the conditions contained in the said provision.

34. Consequently, W.P. No. 26474 of 2021 is dismissed and

W.P.No.17688 of 2021 is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner

to avail of the remedy available under Section 90-A of the A.P.

Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016

within a period of two weeks from today. Any application filed by the

petitioner, in this regard, would be considered and disposed of by the

said authority, in accordance with law and the Gram Panchayath shall

not take any action against the petitioner till such an application is

disposed of. The Respondents shall then act in accordance with the

decision taken in the application filed under section 90-A of the A.P.

Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016.”

W.P.No.13389 of 2024: -

32. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 dated 25.06.2024 directing the petitioner to stop

further work and remove the unauthoirsed development within seven days

failing which further action will be taken including removal of the

unauthoirsed construction and further action will be issued under the

provisions of the AP MR & UDA Act, 2016.

33. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are

seeking regularization of the constructed building under the APMR &

UDA Act, 2016 for which the respondent No.2 has got power to exercise

its discretion favourably. He also refers to the GO Ms.No.369, Revenue

(Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022 saying that there was an allotment

of land to an extent of Ac.1-61 cents in Survey No.1022-2 at Masapeta

village, Rayachoti Mandal, Annamayya District in favour of the

petitioner’s party for construction of party office buildings on lease basis

for a period of 33 years on payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum in

terms of G.O.Ms.NO.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016

subject to certain conditions. He further refers to the proceedings of the

District Collector dated 06.06.2022 and the representation of the petitioners

dated 26.06.2024 submitted in pursuance of the impugned provisional

order of the respondent No.2 dated 25.06.2024. The Tahsildar, Rayachoty

issued the advance possession certificate of the subject land dated

22.11.202 and the Joint Sub-Registrar of Rayachoti also issued Market

Value Certificate for the subject land dated 03.08.2023. It is alleged in the

impugned provisional order of the respondent No.2 dated 25.06.2024 that

the petitioner proceeded with the unauthorized construction without

obtaining prior permission from the competent authority as per Sections

88(1) & 89(1 & 2) & 90(1) of AP MR & UDA Act, 2016.

W.P.No.13393 of 2024: -

34. This writ petition is filed questioning the notice issued by the

respondent No.2 dated 24.06.2024 alleging unauthorized construction of

the subject building in Survey Nos.23-2, 27-1 and 27-3 in Labour Colony,

Vidyadharapuram Village, Vijayawada of NTR District in an extent of

Ac.1-10 cents on lease basis for a period of 33 years in favour of the

president, YSR Congress party for construction of the party office for

which the petitioners submitted their representation dated 25.06.2024. the

counsel for the petitioners refers to the G.O.Ms.No.761, Revenue (Lands.I)

Department, dated 20.12.2022 showing allotment of land to an extent of

1850 sq.yds in R.S.No.28/3 of Vidyadharapuram Village, Vijayawada

West Mandal, NTR District in favour of YSR Congress Party for

construction of party office buildings on lease for a period of 33 years on

payment of RS.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340

Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject to certain

conditions. He further refers to the property tax receipt paid on the open

land dated 20.06.2024, 23.08.2023, and 14.06.2024, the proceedings of the

Commissioner, dated 15.09.2023, and the land handing over certificate

issued by the Mandal Revenue Inspector and the Mandal Surveyor of

Vijayawada West Mandal.

W.P.No.13396 of 2024: -

35. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.3 dated 26.06.2024 alleging unauthorized construction

in an extent of Ac.2-00 cents in R.S.No.371-A1, S.W.No.IV of

Machilipatnam Town for which the petitioner submitted explanation on

27.06.2024.

36. The counsel for the petitioners refers to the proceedings of the

Collector and District Magistrate, Krishna, Machilipatnam dated

15.06.2022, the G.O.Ms.NO.360, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated

18.05.2022 showing allotment of land in an extent of Ac.2-00 cents in

100

R.S.No.371-A1, S.W.No.IV, Machilipatnam Town and Mandal, Krishna

District on lease basis for a period of 33 years on payment Rs.1,000/- per

acre per annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department,

dated 21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions, the possession handed over

certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Machilipatnam, dated 27.06.2022, the

property tax receipts on land dated 20.06.2024, 06.02.2024 and

21.09.2024, the building application form vide

B.A.No.1070/0329/B/MCP/EDPL/2023 dated 25.07.2023 and the building

permit order issued by the Machilipatnam Urban Development Authority

respondent No.4 herein vide permit No.1070/0329/B/MCP/EDPL.2023

dated 21.06.2024. Accordingly, the construction was also completed

without any deviations as per the plans submitted along with the relevant

provisions of law.

W.P.No.13397 of 2024:-

37. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.3 dated 25.06.2024 alleging unauthorized construction

of the commencement of the subject building for which the petitioner

submitted explanation dated 26.06.2024 to the respondent No.3.

38. The counsel for the petitioner also refers to the G.O.Ms.No.243,

Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 16.06.2023 showing the allotment of

101

the work in Survey No.504-2 of Moolasagaram Village, Nandyala Mandal,

Nandyala District in favour of the District President, YSR Congress Party

for construction of YSR Congress Party office building on lease basis for a

period of 33 years on payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum as per

G.O.Ms.No.340, duly cancelling the land allotment order issued earlier

vide G.O.Ms.No.374, dated 18.05.2022 and in terms of G.O.Ms.No.571,

Revenue (Assn.I) Dept, dated 14.09.2012, under BSO-24A, subject to

certain conditions. He also refers to the orders passed by this court in

W.P.No.12814 of 2024 dated 21.06.2024 and the order passed by this court

as stated above in W.P.No.17688 & 26474 of 2021 dated 05.08.2022.

He further submits that after basement is completed, no further

constructions are made pursuant to the issuance of the impugned

provisional order.

W.P.No.13408 of 2024:

39. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order of the

respondent No.3 dated 24.06.2024 alleging unauthorized construction by

the petitioner in an extent of Ac.2-00 in Survey No.660/P of Eluru urban

area situated at Beside ASR Stadium, opposite main Railway station area

for which the petitioner submitted explanation dated 26.06.2024.

102

40. The learned counsel for the petitioners also refers to the proceedings

of the Collector & District Magistrate, Eluru dated 23.06.2022,

G.O.Ms.No.358, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022

showing the allotment of the land to an extent of Ac.2-00 in R.S.No.660 of

Eluru Town and Mandal, Eluiru District in faovur of YSR Congress Party

for construction of party office buildings on lease basis for a period of 33

years on payment of RS.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of

G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject

to certain conditions, possession handed over certificate issued by the

Tahsildar, Eluru Mandal dated 14.09.2022, the property tax receipts, and

the building permit order issued by the respondent No.4 vide Permit

No.1075/0173/B/Ele/RAIL STA/2023 dated 25.06.2024. Accordingly,

the construction of the subject building was completed as per the building

permit order and as per the plans submitted without any deviations.

W.P.No.13410 of 2024: -

41. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 dated 25.06.2024 alleging unauthoised construction

residential, ground + first floors for which the petitioner has submitted

explanation dated 27.06.2024.

103

42. The counsel for the petitioner submits that almost the building is

completed except certain final works. He also refers to the

G.O.Ms.No.351, Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022

showing the allotment of land to an extent of Ac.1-18 cents in Survey

No.458-2B at Balagam village, Parvathipuram Mandal, Parvathipuram

Manyam District in favour of YSR Congress Party for construction of

party office buildings on lease basis for a period of 33 years on payment of

Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue

(Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions.

The proceedings of the Collector & District Magistrate, Parvathipuram

Manyam District, dated 05.12.2022, the possession handed over certificate

issued by the Tahsildar, Parvathipuram Mandal, dated 07.12.2022 and the

tax payment receipts on the open land.

W.P.No.13412 of 2024: -

43. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 dated 24.06.2024 alleging unauthoirsed construction

in the premises of D.No./Plat No.NA situated at Vidyanagar Street,

Vidyanagar area for which the petitioners submitted their explanation dated

26.06.2024.

104

44. The counsel for the petitioners also refers to the G.O.Ms.No.363,

Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022 showing the allotment of

land to an extent of Ac.2-00 cents in Survey No.1291-5 at East Bapatla

Village and Mandal, Bapatla District in favour of YSR Congress party for

construction of party office buildings on lease basis for a period of 33 years

on payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340,

Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject to certain

conditions, the certificate of handing over of the possession issued by the

Tahsildar, Bapatla Mandal, dated 15.12.2022, the open land tax paid

receipts and the building application form submitted by the petitioners to

the respondent No.2 vide B.A.No.1019.0051/B/BPT/TC/2023 dated

07.03.2023.

W.P.No.13540 of 2024:

45. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.7 under AP MR & UDA , 2016 dated 25.06.2024

alleging unauthorized construction for which the petitioners submitted its

explanation dated 25.06.2024.

46. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.7 has

no interest to issue the impugned provisional order. He also refers to the

G.O.Ms.No.359, dated 18.05.2022 showing the allotment of land to an

105

extent of Ac.0-72 cents in Survey No.201-3 of NRP Agraharam Village,

Undi Mandal, West Godavari District in favour of the petitioners party for

construction of party office building on lease basis for a period of 33 years

in terms of G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated

21.07.2016 subject to certain conditions. The proceedings of the Collector

and District Magistrate, Bhimavaram, West Godavari dated 12.04.2024,

the possession handed over certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Undi,

dated 13.04.2023 and the property tax receipt in the open land dated

25.11.2022.

W.P.No.13557 of 2024: -

47. This writ petition is filed questioning the provisional order issued by

the respondent No.2 dated 24.06.2024 alleging unauthorized construction

of the petitioners’party office situated at Block No.15-10-A of

Lingamguntla Agraharam Narsaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District for which

the petitioners submitted their explanation dated 27.06.2024.

48. The counsel for the petitioners also refers to the G.O.Ms.No.364,

Revenue (Lands.I) Department, dated 18.05.2022, showing the allotment

of land in an extent of Ac.1-15 cents in Block No.15-10-A at Lingamguntla

Village, Narsaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District in favour of the petitioners

party for construction of party office buildings on lease basis for a period

106

of 33 years on payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre per annum in terms of

G.O.Ms.No.340, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.07.2016 subject

to certain conditions and the proceedings of the Panchayat Secretary,

Lingamguntla dated 13.02.2023.

49. However, all the counsels for the petitioners submitted in one voice

that the subject buildings are under the threat of demolition at any time

without following the due procedure as the above said impugned

proceedings are issued across the State in different places more or less on

the same dates which gives rise to a strong suspicion that the respondent

authorities are predetermined to take coercive action against the petitioners

party offices high handedly without giving due opportunity for the

petitioners to substantiate their cases. In fact the alleged violations are

curable defects only as per law without resorting to any demolitions.

50. Thus, besides making independent submissions, as stated above,

the other learned counsels for the petitioners broadly adopted the

submissions made by the learned senior counsel Mr.P.Veera Reddy,

who appears for the petitioners in W.P.No.13258 of 2024 which need not

be repeated as they are already referred above.

51. On the other hand, the learned Advocate General countered all these

submissions of the learned counsels for the petitioners stating that the

107

respondent authorities will follow the due process of law pursuant to the

above said impugned proceedings of provisional orders/confirmation

orders/notices as the case may be. In W.P.No.13251 of 2024 also the

petitioners were asked to attend the personal hearing on 27.06.2024 but he

is not aware whether they have appeared or not. He also further submitted

that the confirmation order which is impugned in W.P.No.13244 of 2024

will be treated as provisional order and the petitioners can make

explanation to the respondent authorities concerned and if so the same will

be considered.

52. The apprehension of the petitioners that their subject buildings will

be demolished without following the due procedure by citing the example

of demolition of the petitioners’political party’s office building at

Tadepalli is not correct and the same was demolished only after passing the

final orders by following the due procedure and as such the petitioners

need not be apprehensive of taking out any demolitions illegally by the

respondent authorities concerned. Hence prayed for disposal of these writ

petitions enabling the respondent authorities to follow the due procedure

under law.

53. In view of the above said facts and circumstances and upon

consideration of the rival submissions made, it is to be seen that admittedly

under the policy of the State, the subject sites are allotted to the petitioners

108

for construction of the political party office buildings at various places in

the State of Andhra Pradesh vide the above said GOs, the delivery of

possession of the same were made, the property taxes for the open lands

were paid, the building permission applications were made, in some cases

building permit orders were also issued, in few cases the building

permission applications have to be submitted and in majority of the cases

the construction of the subject buildings were almost completed. It is also

not the case of the respondents that they have ever visited the subject

buildings earlier at the time of constructions and objected for the same on

the ground of deviations if any except issuing the above said impugned

proceedings after a long gap of time.

54. It is the specific case of the petitioners that there are no deviations

from the plans submitted in the construction of the subject buildings and

they were taken up by complying with all the required provisions of the

law specifically under the A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the

A.P.MRUDA Act, 2016 and the Rules made therein. They also sought for

regularization of the buildings if necessary by imposing penalties on the

constructions made already in some cases as it is permissible under law.

They further submitted that the demolitions if any to any extent of the

subject buildings will not endure to anybody’s benefit except loss of huge

money invested already by the petitioners for the subject constructions

109

after paying lots of money towards charges and fee for the sanction of

building permissions and the Government also will be deprived of

collection of property tax further if the demolitions are taken place when

they are not affecting in any manner the public interest. The alleged

violations are curable defects under law and the demolitions are not

warranted.

55. Be that as it may, since the impugned proceedings were already

issued and the explanations have already been submitted which are

pending before the authorities concerned, it is just and proper to dispose of

these writ petitions enabling the authorities concerned to proceed further in

the matters with the following directions:

1) The respondent authorities concerned are directed to proceed

with the above said impugned proceedings by following the due

procedure in accordance with law.

2) The petitioners are permitted to submit the explanations/

additional explanations, if any, enclosing all the necessary documents

and the other proofs if any in support of their claims within a period

of two weeks from today to the authorities concerned for the above

said purpose.

3) On completion of the said period, the respondent authorities

are directed to proceed with the necessary enquiry by considering the

110

explanations/additional explanations of the petitioners by giving due

opportunity to all the parties concerned including the petitioners and

upon verification of the records and the subject buildings,

appropriate decision shall be taken on their own merits in respect of

each case.

4) At every stage of the proceedings pending before the

authorities concerned, a due opportunity of hearing shall be given to

the petitioners wherever it is warranted under law specifically under

the provisions of the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the AP

Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016

and the Rules made thereunder.

5) During the pendency of any of these proceedings before the

authorities concerned, there shall not be any coercive steps with

respect to the subject buildings to any extent.

6) The petitioners shall be permitted to avail and exhaust all the

remedies available under law before the authorities concerned.

7) The respondent authorities while exercising the discretion and

decision making shall act fairly and objectively in consonance with

the provisions of the law.

8) The power of demolition should be exercised by the

respondent authorities concerned only if the deviations made during

the construction are not in public interest or cause public nuisance or

111

hazardous or dangerous to the public safety including the residents

therein and if the deviations are minor, minimal or trivial, or do not

affect public at large the respondent authorities shall not resort to

demolition.

and

9) The power of demolition should not be resorted to unless the

overwhelming public interest is involved.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no

order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending if any shall

stand closed.

_____________________________

JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

July 4, 2024

Note:

LR copy to be marked

{B/o}

Lmv

112

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

WRIT PETITION Nos.13258, 13240, 13212, 13244, 13248, 13250,

13251, 13253, 13254, 13272, 13249, 13382, 13389, 13393, 13396, 13397,

13408, 13410, 13412, 13540, 13557 of 2024

04.07.2024

LMV

Reference cases

Description

Legal Notes

Add a Note....