Sri Vedullaplli Butchi Venkata Krishna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

APHC010611822025

¶2

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

¶3

[3457]

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31543/2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

SRI VEDULLAPLLI BUTCHI VENKATA KRISHNA,, S/O. VEDULLPALLI JANARDHANA GANDHI, OCCPRIVATE EMPLOYEE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. RESIDENT OF D.NO.39-33-24/3, DARMANAGAR, MADHAVADARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.

¶11

THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶12

THE TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, ZONE-V, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶13

THE TAHSILDAR, GOPALAPATNAM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

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 an order or direction, in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of therespondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the house property measuring an extent of 121.416 Square yards out of 170 square yards bearing D.No.39-33-24/3, covered by S.No. 7/1 and 7/4 of Madhavadhara Village, Gopalapatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, without following the due procedure as contemplated under law is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of principles of natural justice and consequentlydirect the respondents No.2 to 4 not to interfere with the petitioners land admeasuring an measuring an extent of 121.416 Square yardsout of 170 square yards bearing D.No.39-33-24/3,

¶16

//2//

¶17

covered by S.No. 7/1 and 7/4 of Madhavadhara Village, Gopalapatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam Districtand pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶18

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 not to interfere with the petitioner’s house property admeasuring an extent of 121.416 Square yards bearing D.No.39-33- 24/3, covered by S.No. 7/1 and 7/4 of Madhavadhara Village, Gopalapatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following the due procedure, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶19

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶20

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 3'''^and 4*^respondents to conduct a joint survey in the presence of an Advocate Commissioner to ascertain the discrepancy between the extent and boundaries of the petitioner’s property as recorded in the registered sale deed and those reflected in the GVMC shortfall endorsement in respect of the petitioner’s house property admeasuring an extent of 121.416 square yards, bearing D.No. 39-33-24/3, covered by S.No. 7/1 and 7/4 of Madhavadhara Village, Gopalapatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, without following the due procedure, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.NARASIMHA REDDY. G . L

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following:

¶25

//3//

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.31543 of 2025

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in interfering with his property.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is purchased the land admeasuring 121.46 square yards vide registered sale deed dated 09.03.2025. It is submitted that the petitioner has erected Tea Stall over the same and the respondent authorities are trying to dispossess the petitioner without issuing any notice. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the vendor of the petitioner has been paying applicable taxes from the year 2004 onwards.

¶30

The learned standing counsel for the 2^nd respondent submits that the petitioner was granted building permit order in pursuance of his application, however, post physical verification an endorsement dated 18.09.2023 notified certain short falls which are to be complied by the petitioner. Subject to complying with the shortfalls, the permission shall be issued by the 2^nd respondent.

¶31

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in possession of 121.46 Square yards and the

¶32

//4//

¶33

adjoining land about 50 square yards is classified as Government land and that the petitioner has not constructed any temporary structure over the said government land.

¶34

Considering the submissions, there shall be a direction to the respondent authority to consider the representation dated 07.11.2025 of the petitioner for conducting a joint survey and the respondent shall complete the joint survey subject to the petitioner paying the applicable survey fee. Till the survey is completed there shall be a further direction to the respondent authorities not to disturb the peace of the petitioner. The survey

¶35

to be conducted after issuance of notices to all concerned.

¶36