Petitioner challenged inaction of municipality. Court found building permission granted to respondent. Held prayer does not survive. Petition closed but liberty to challenge permit granted.
Writ petition closed. Liberty granted to challenge building permission No. 1002/0003/B/DMM/Mad/2024.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
'o iff
X
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SAtV'^
WRIT PETITION NO: 3473 OF 2024
Between:
Mamilla Ravindranath. S/o Late M Anajineyulu. Agedabout54 years, R/o D.No. 7-94-5, Gandhi Nagar, Dharamavaram Town, Sri Satya Sai District.
...PETITIONER
AND
District
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue writ, order or a direction particularly one in the nature
/
/
of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent No. 2 in n^t "" taking any action, pursuant to representations of the petitioner dated 3008-2023, 31-01-2024 and 02-02-2024 being illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to forthwith stop all construction activities in land admeasuring 128 Sq. yards in survey Nos. 414-9, 414-10 and 414-8 of Sri Satya Sai District, Puttaparthi Reg, Dharmavaram Sub, . r Dharamavgr^am Village, Dharamavaram Municipal Area, 7 Ward Gandhinagar Street. lA 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 direct the 2"'^ respondent take action for removal of the unauthorized structures raised by the 4th respondent in land admeasuring 128 sq. yards 414-9, 414-10 and 4148 of Sri Satya Sai District, Puttaparthi Reg D, Dharmavaram Sub Village, Area, to Dharamavaram D, Municipal Dharamavaram 7*'' Ward, Gandhinagar Street pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: GP FOR SRI N. RANGA REDDY
(SC FOR MUNCIPALITY)
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI MAHESWARA RAO KENCHEM
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
i /
/ ■f
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION No.3473 OF 2024
Between:
| Mamilla Ravindranath, |
S/o Late |
|
|---|---|---|
| M.Anajineyulu, Aged about | 54 years, R/o | |
| D.No.7-94-5, Gandhi Nagar, | Dharamavaram | |
| Town, Sri Satya Sai District. | ... Petitioner |
And
| The State of Andhra Pradesh, |
Rep. By its |
|---|---|
| Principal Secretary, |
Municipal |
| Administration Department, |
Secretariat |
| Buildings, Velagapudi, Amarava District and three others. |
ti, Guntur ... Respondents |
| Counsel for the petitioner | : Sri K.Srinivas |
| Counsel for respondent No.l | : GP for Municipal Administration |
| Counsel for respondent Nos.2 Ss | 3 : Sri N.Ranga Reddy, Standing Counsel |
| CounselforrespondentNo.4 | : Sri K.Maheswara Rao |
ORDER
The above writ petition is filed to declare the inactionof respondent No.2 in initiating action, pursuant to the
\
i
Page 2 of4
SRSJ W.P.No.3473 of 2024
representations made by the petitiorier dated 30.08.2023, 31.01.2024 and 02.02.2024, as illegal and arbitraiy.
- Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sai Kiran, learned counsel. representing Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 & 3.
- In the affidavit, it was contended that the subject property is joint property and petitioner filed O.S.No.26 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Dharmavaram, seeking partition and the same is pending consideration. Respondent No.4, a subsequent purchaser is making construction and hence, the petitioner made representations. However, no action was initiated by the respondent authorities.
4 Sri V.Sai Kiran, learned counsel representing Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 86 3 would submit that respondent No.4 applied for building permission and the same was granted vide permit No. 1002/0003/B/DMM/Mad/2024, dated 13.01.2024. The
Page 3 of 4
P-
SRS,J W.P.No.3473 of 2024
copy of said permit along with plan is handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
- In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks. ;• ■■ - liberty to challenge the permit No.l002/0003/B/DMM/Mad/2024, dated 13.01.2024.
.6. Since .^building permission is granted in favour of respondent No.4, the prayer sought in the writ petitiondoesnot survive. No further adjudication is required in the writ petition.
- Accordingly, the Writ petition is closed. However, it is open to the writ petition .to. challenge the building permission, if is aggrieved. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,shall stand dismissed.
SDI- K. TATA RAO
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
r
SECTION OFFICER
To,
f
HIGH COURT
DATED: 16/02/2024
x>
a\
40 2 5 JUL 20?^ Co. I
Current Section
%*
ORDER
WP.No.3473 of 2024
CLOSING THE W.P
WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking mandamus is maintainable when the underlying building permission is valid.
Mamilla Ravindranath
The State Of Andhra Pradesh
The Dharamavaram Municipality
Seela Janardhan
SUBBA REDDY SATTI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
