Chintada Dayanidhi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayathi Raj and Rural Development, Secretariat Building, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶18

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam^District.

¶19

The Panchayat Secretary, Rajayyapeta Grama Panchayath,^Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

m

w

...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 a writ of mandamus or to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents to utilise the land of Open Space in L.P.No.6/2000 in an extent of Ac.0.90 cts in S.Nos. 101 and 102 with all subdivisions therein located at Rajayyapeta Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam, for purpose of construction of Material Resource Facility (MRF) as illegal or arbitrary malafide irresponsible and violative of principles of Natural Justice apart from being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶25

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 to direct the 2nd respondent not to initiate any construction of Material Resource Facility (MRF) center under the guise of Solid Waste Management in Open Space in L.P.No.6/2000 in an extent of Ac.0.90 cts in S.Nos. 101 and 102 with all subdivisions therein located in Rajayyapeta Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam in the interests of Justice.

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI D KRISHNA REPRESENTING

¶27

SRI P VISESWAR RAO

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL

¶29

DEV

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI P CHAITANYA SRINIVAS REPRESENTING SRI Y KOTESWARA RAO (SC FOR ZPPS, MPPS & GP)

¶32

The Court made the following order:

¶33

H APHC010290002025

¶34

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶35

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶36

TUESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA

¶39

PRASAD

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO: 15253 OF 2025

¶41

Between:

¶42

CHINTADA DAYANIDHI, S/o Appalasuri, aged 56 years, Plot No 27, Gayathri Nagar, Rajayyapeta Panchayat, Akkireddy Palem, Jutada - Visahakapatnam. 2. Batchala Vasudevarao, S/o Madhava Rao, aged 57 years,^DNo38-33- 72/6/25, Vaikuntavasam, Narendra Nagar, Maripalem, Prime Apartments, Visakapatnam.

¶43

Allu Sivala Govindarao, S/o Adi Narayana, aged 68 years, 4-147-5, Ajantha Park, Lg Polymers Road, Rrv Puram, Visakhapatnam.

¶44

Rongali Padmavathi, W/o Yernaidu, Aged about 53 years, D No 23-126, Ganesh Colony Road, Srinivasa Nagar, Visakhapatnam

¶45

Batthula Amaravani, W/o Sudhakar, aged 51 years, 6/254/3/1 ,Sai Nagar Colony, Near Simhachalam, Goshala, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam. ...Petitioners

¶46

AND

¶47

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayathi Raj and Rural Development, Secretariat Building, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶48

The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam^District.

¶49

Tha Panchayat Secretary, , Rajayyapeta Grama Panchayath, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

...Respondents

1

2

Counsel for the Petitioners: P VISESWAR RAO

¶54

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL^DEV Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR REVENUE

¶55

The Court made the followingORAL ORDER:

¶56

Heard Sri D. Krishna, learned Counsel appearing on^behalfofSri P. Viseswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners; Sri P. Chaitanya Srinivas, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for ZPPs, MPPs and Gram Panchayat^andSriT. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader^forRevenue.

¶57

Sri T. Sanjeeva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri P. Chaitanya Srinivas, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for ZPPs, MPPs and Gram Panchayat have submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the District Collector, Visakhapatnam dated 04.07.2025 and the Panchayat Secretary, Rajayyapeta Grama Panchayat dated 24.06.2025. Copies of both Written Instructions were supplied to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners. The same are taken on record. 3. The controversy involved in the present case seems^thatthereare five Writ Petitioners in number, who are the owners of some plots of various extents in the lay-out that has been made by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority (VUDA). It is the contention^{oftheWritPetitionersthat} the plots owned by them have now been alienated in favour of Rajayyapeta Grama Panchayat and that the Rajayyapeta Grama Panchayat is now contemplating to hand over the portion of the land owned by the Writ Petitioners to the N.G.O by name Centre for Youth Development^&Activities (CYDA) for the purpose of establishing Material Recovery Facility Centre. 4. It is the contention of the Writ Petitioners that while they are the owners of the various plots, the Official Respondents^{wouldhavenodomain}

¶58

3

¶59

over it to allot the same land in favour of CYDA for the purpose of establishing Material Recovery Facility Centre.

¶60

The Written Instructions furnished by the District Collector, Visakhapatnam dated 04.07.2025 and the Panchayat Secretary, dated 24.06.2025 would indicate that they have not violated anybody’s right in allotting the place for establishment of Material Recovery Facility Centre. 6. Flaving regard to the above facts, it appears to the Court that the controversy revolves around the identification of the property belonging to the Writ Petitioners on one hand and the land that is proposed^tobehanded over to the CYDA on the otherhand. 7. In this view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, at the admission stage, without going into merits, directing the Official Respondents to conduct a joint survey by the Respondent Authorities in the presence of the Writ Petitioners for identification of the places which are purchased by the Writ Petitioners from VUDA and the land that is proposed to be allotted to CYDA. For this purpose, the Official Respondents shall conduct a joint survey on 22.07.2025 at 10.30 A.M. Since the Writ Petitioners are already aware of the time fixed for the joint survey, they need not be informed. However, the Official Respondents, particularly, the Tahsildar and the Panchayat Secretary shall issue Advance Notices to^all the parties in the neighbourhood by informing the time and date of the survey within two weeks as per due process of law. After the conduct of survey, the Tahsildar shall supply a copy of the Report to all the participants including the Writ Petitioners. The Writ Petitioners are however required to pay the requisite fee for the conduct of survey.

¶61