Disposed

Ghantasala Dana Kumari v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 May 2024WP/3238/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner feared demolition of her house compound wall without due process. Standing counsel submitted no notice had been issued and authorities would act per law. Court disposed of the petition directing respondents not to take coercive steps except under due process of law, without costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed not to take coercive steps against the compound wall except under due process of law; no costs; miscellaneous applications closed.

Ghantasala Dana Kumari Vs State of Andhra… — Municipal and Town Planning | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY. THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 3238 OF 2024

¶6

Between;

¶7

Ghantasala Dana Kumari, W/o. G.Satyanarayana, aged about 53 years R/o.Sidhapuram village, Akiveedu Mandal, West Godavari^District

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,^Guntur District

¶11

Akiveedu Municipality, Akiveedu, West Godavari District^{rep.by its} Commissioner

¶12

...Respondents

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other^{appropriateWrit,} order or direction declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in seeking to demolish compound wall of her house property in D.No.^{17-66,Akiveedu,} West Godavari District or any portion of the same without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary etc., and grant^such other reliefs or relief.

¶14

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶15

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 demolish compound wall of her house propety in D.No. 17-66,^{Akiveedu,West} Godavari District or any portion of the same or dispossess^thempending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

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 dispense with filing of English Translated copies of Exs.P2 to P5 in the above Writ Petition for the present.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. VVLNSARMA

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI M MANOHAR REDDY (SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES)

¶21

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶22

APHC010051702024

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶24

[3332]

¶25

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶26

THURSDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 3238/2024

¶30

Between:

¶31

Ghantasala Dana Kumari

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

AND

¶34

State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶36

1.VVL N SARMA

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶38

1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶39

2.M MANOHAR REDDY (SC FOR MUNC AND MUNC CORP )

¶40

The Court made the following:

¶41

ORDER:

¶42

The short grievance of the petitioner is that, the respondents are contemplating to demolish the compound wall of the petitioner’s subject house property bearing D.No.17-66, Akiveedu, West Godavari District, without following due process of law.

¶43

Heard Sri M.V.V.L.N.Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing counsel for Municipal Corporation.

¶44

elaboration contended that, the 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in contemplating to without following due process of law, are respondents house. Hence, prayed to pass demolish the compound wall of the petitioner’s appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. counter submitted that. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel on so far no notice has been issued to^{thepetitionerfordemolitionofthe} compound wall and further the authorities^{wouldtakestepsinaccordancewith} law.

¶45

Demolition of compound wall of her house, without following due process of law is the grievance of the petitioner in^{thepresentwritpetition.As} with law, there ,s no the authorities have intention to take steps in accordance this court is inclined to purpose in keeping the writ petition and accordingly of the writ petition with the following direction. dispose

¶46

directed not to take any coercive steps The respondent authorities are except under due process of law.

¶47

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs,

¶48

Miscellaneous applications pending if any shall stand closed.

¶49

SD/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶50

To Administration and Urban Development ’l. The Secretary, Municipal Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur

¶51

Department, State of Andhra

¶52

1. DistrictThe Commissioner , Akiveedu Municipality, Akiveedu, West Godavari T OnrcC to SRI VV L N SARMA Advocate [OPUC] 4. OneCCto Ic FOR OEV. Hi.. ..

¶53

5 Two CCS to GP FOR Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶54

Three CD Copies

NPC - AF Section

HIGH COURT

RC,J

DATE0:02/05/2024

ORDER

WP.No.3238 of 2024

^?ANDH^
'O
g (7 DEC 2m Z

¶62

DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Ghantasala Dana Kumari v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghantasala Dana Kumari v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saripalli Srilakshmi Harshitha Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Krishna Main Road Building Owners Association (REG.NO.182/2022) Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kothari Ramachandra Rao, Vs District Collector, Ongole,Prakasam District

M/s Garrison Constructions, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Malepati Radharam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Lakshmi Prasanna Borewells Vs the State of Ap