Nvn Gupta Mamidi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Donthukuni Nageswara Rao, S/o. Donthukurti Sriramchandra^Murthy, aged 53 years, R/o. 7-46, Kothavalasa, Opposite to ZPH School Ground, Kothavalasa, Vizianagaram District, Andhra^{Pradesh-535183.}

¶11

Rajana Paiditalli, W/o. R. Prasad Rao, aged 46 years, R/O 7-143, Gayatri Nagar Street, Kothavalasa, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh-535183.

¶12

Sita Rajya Lakshmi Mudunooru, W/o. Mudunooru Verma Raju, aged 53 years, R/O 3-133, Rajula VeedhiLakkavarapu Kota, Vizianagaram, Bheemali, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh-535240

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principle Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, A.P Secretariat Office, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur Dist, Andhra Pradesh.

¶16

The District Collector and District Program Coordinator, MGNREGS, AP, Vizainagaram, Vizainagaram District.

¶17

/ *

¶18

The District Panchayat Officer, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh, the Tahsildar of Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District,^Andhra Pradesh.

¶19

The Grama Panchayat, Rep by Its Secretary, Kothavalasa Grama Panchayeti, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶20

Theegala Venkata Ramanaji, S/o. Late Viswanadha Rao, aged 68 years, R/o. D.No. 12-63/1, Sabbavaram Road, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

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 Order or direction particularly,^{oneinthenatureofwrit} of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in kept pending the representation dated 03/01/2025 to take action against the 6 th respondent while he was obstructing the common passage way over the Panchyathy road of extent 20 feet road over the survey^No. 136/1 situated atKothavalasa Village and Mandal Vizianagaram District,^{AndhraPradeshisas} illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of Natural justice and also theviolation of Art.21 and 300-A of Constitution of Indiaand consequently direct the respondent authorities to prevent the un-official respondents not to create any obstructions to the petitioners in using the panchayeti road consider the representation dated 03/01/2025.

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation dated 03/01/2025 in accordance with the law and pass order or orders in accordance with law pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI JADA SRAVAN KUMAR

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND

¶27

RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI M.S.R. CHANDRA MURTHY, SC

¶29

FOR MGNREGS

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No.4:GP FOR REVENUE

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI Y. KOTESWARA RAO,^SCFOR

¶32

ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent No.6:-—

¶34

The Court made the following order:

¶35

APHC010117082025

¶36

[3329]

¶37

APHC010117082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 050 AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶38

WEDNESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶39

PRESENT

¶40

JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA THE HONOURABLE SRI

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO: 5850/2025

¶42

Between:

¶43

VENKATA SUBBARAO, 0, SUN

¶44

1.NVN GUPTA MAMIDI, 0/0 MAMIDI GROUND, KOTHAVALASA,

¶45

PITY OPP Z P HH SCHOOL VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-53518

¶46

S/0

¶47

RAO

¶48

7-46, KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM 535183.

¶49

PRASAD RAO, AGED 46 YEARS, R/0 7-

¶50

3 RAJANA PAIDITALLI, W/0 R KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM

¶51

143 GAYATRl NAGAR STREET DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-535183

¶52

RAJ U LA

¶53

BHEEMALl,

¶54

...PETITIONER(S)

¶55

AND

¶56

OFFICE PRADESH.

¶57

2.THE district collector VIZAINAGARAM,AND districtVIZAINAGARAMPROGRAM COORDINATOR, MGNREGS, AP DISTRICT.

¶58

VIZIANAGARAM,

¶59

3.THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER

¶60

VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT

¶61

ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶62

VIZIANAGARAM

¶63

THEkothavalasagrama gramapanchayatPANCHAYETI.REP VIZIANAGARAMBY ITS^SECRETARY, ANDHRA PRADESH district,

¶64

■-RESPONDENT(S);

¶65

pleased topleased to issue a Writ Order or r ' nature of writ of Mandamus declarina the e particularly,^oneinthe n kept perrding the represen,afcr:ated OS/Ov^oast Sth respondent while he was obstructinn tho the Panchyathy road of extent 20 fern roLd overT"'“" the atKothavalasa Village and Mandal Vixiana ^ survey No.^{136/1situated} as illegal, arbitral aL violafon of consequently respondents not to in ^rderM Pe=s'T consider the representation dated using the panchayeti road 03/01/2025 and to pass

¶66

lA NO: 1 OF

¶67

Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit filed iin support of the petffion^the h" 'he circumstanoes^stated Pleased to direct dated 03/01/2025 i the respondent authorities to consideMte"’^''representation accordance with law" pe^r d"“ P- -^er or orders in - pending disposal of the above Counsel for the Petitioner(S): writ petition and to pass

¶68

1.JADA SRAVAN KUMAR

¶69

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶70

1 GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ rural dev

¶71

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶72

The Court made the following:

¶73

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶74

WRIT PETITION NO: 5850/2025

¶75

ORDER:

¶76

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226^{oftheConstitutionof}

¶77

India seeking following relief:

¶78

" to issue a Writ, Order or direction particularly^one In the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in kept pending the representation^dated 03/01/2025 to take action against the respondent while^he was obstructing the common passage way over the Panchyathy road of extent 20 feet road over the survey No. 36/1^situatedat Kothavalasa Village and Mandal, Vizianagaram District,^Andhra Pradesh Is as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of Natural justice and also the violation of Art 21 and^300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to prevent the unofficial respondents not to create any obstructions to the petitioners in using the panchayathi^road consider the representation dated 03/01/2025 and to pass such other order or orders

¶79

Heard Sri Karthik Shah, learned counsel representing^{learnedcounsel} for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶80

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are the neighbouring land owners of the respondent No.6 and purchased their respective lands through valid sale deeds. He further^submits that before entering into the agreement with the vendor, the 1®' petitioner approached the 5‘^ respondent by way of RTl application to get clarity on the panchayat road

¶81

and sought infornnation pertaining to the lands and approvals of the 6'^ respondent. Upon which, the 5"^ respondent issued proceedings dated 31.05.2024 informing that the land adjacent to the BT Road in Sy.No.136/1 is shown as 20 feet road in all the plans and the 20 feet road is finally considered as Panchayat Road.

¶82

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that at the time of purchasing the lands by the petitioners, the alleged CC road was originally classified as panchayat road which is utilised as common passage/ rasta by the petitioners along with some other villagers. Later, the petitioners and other villagers approached respondent No.5 to provide drainage^{connectiontotheir} lands after laying down the CC road over the panchayat road. While things stood thus, without making the petitioners herein as proper parties, respondent No.6 filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.2618 of 2025 requesting for removal of 20 feet CC road alleging that the CC road was laid over his land. He further submits that after filing the writ petition, the e'*" respondent is causing obstructions to the petitioners and other villagers and all are facing lot of inconvenience for entering into the their lands through a common passage i.e.,CC road. For which, the petitioners’ herein submitted a representation dated 03.01.2025 to the respondent No.5 requesting not to obstruct the common passage which is being utilised by the petitioners as well as other villagers. Even after receipt of the said representation, the respondent authorities neither considered the same nor issued any other proceedings.

¶83

Hence the writ petition.

¶84

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the representation dated^{03.01.2025submitted} by the petitioners would be considered by the respondent authorities, in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.

¶85

Having regard to the submissions made by both the learned^counsel and on perusal of the material placed on record, this^{courtisoftheconsidered} view that the present writ petition can be disposed of, directing the respondent authorities, more particularly, 5*^ respondent herein to consider the representation dated 03.01.2025 submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, with reference to the proceedings dated 31.05.2025 issued by the respondent No.5, after providing opportunity of hearing to both the parties, in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall^{benoorderastocosts.}

¶86

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶87

Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTlOirOFFICER

¶88

To,

¶89