K.Balakrishna Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.BALAKRISHNA REDDY,, S/O.K.AIIURI REDDY, AGED 51 YEARS,OCC.EMPLOYEE, R/O.PLOT NO.101,MS-9, SRI SAI RESIDENCY,GURUBRAMHA NAGAR, KALLUR, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

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

¶16

THE KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518004.

¶17

THE DEPUTY CITY PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518004.

¶18

S NAGAPPA, S/O.S.BASAPPA, AGED 70 YEARS,OCC.BUSINESS, R/O.PLOT NO.65, H.NO.76/111-46-4-1-G-4, GEETHANAGAR,KALLUR, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶19

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶20

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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, order or directions, more

¶21

2

¶22

HN, J W.P.Nos.8433 and 8556 _2025

¶23

particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents 2nd and 3 herein in taking the action on the illegal construction being made by the 4th respondent contrary to the building permission from the 2nd respondent Municipal Corporation and by encroaching the Irrigation Canal in respect of land in Plot No.65, H.No.76/111-46-41-G-4, (Old H.No.76/100-5) in Sy.No.283,288/3,303/1,303/3, situated at Geetha Nagar, Ward No.76, Kallur Village fields, Kurnool City within the limits of 2 respondent Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool District, inspite of petitioner representations dated.0101-2025,which is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional. contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act and violation of Articles 14,19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondents 2 and 3 to take action on the petitioner representations dated. 01-01-2025 and remove the illegal construction being made by the 4th respondent in the subject house and pass

¶24

IA 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to consider my representation dated. 01-01-2025, which was made against the illegal construction made by the 4*^ respondent contrary to the sanctioned plan by encroaching the Irrigation Canal forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.CHALLA SIVASANKAR

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In

¶30

2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶31

The Court made the following

¶32

3

¶33

HN, J W.P.Nos.8433 and 8556 _2025

¶34

APHC010161132025

¶35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶36

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶37

[3457]

¶38

MONDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶39

PRESENT

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO: 8556/2025

¶42

Between:

¶43

K.BALAKRISHNA REDDY,, S/O.K.AIIURI REDDY, AGED 51 YEARS,OCC.EMPLOYEE, R/O.PLOT NO.101,MS-9, SRI SAI RESIDENCY,GURUBRAMHA NAGAR, KALLUR, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT

¶44

...PETITIONER

¶45

AND

¶46

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

¶47

THE KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518004.

¶48

THE DEPUTY CITY PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518004.

¶49

S VENUGOPAL, S/O.S.NAGAPPA, AGED 35 YEARS,OCC.EMPLOYEE, R/O.PLOT NO.61, H.NO.76/100-3-5-E-1, GEETHANAGAR,KALLUR, KURNOOL CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT

¶50

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶51

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 a Writ, order or directions, more particularly one in

¶52

4

¶53

HN, J

¶54

W.P.Nos.8433 and 8556 _2025 the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents 2 and 3 herein in taking the action on the illegal construction being made by the 4th respondent contrary to the building permission from the 2nd respondent Municipal Corporation and by encroaching the Irrigation Canal in respect of land in plot No.61 with H.No.76/100-3-5-E1(Old H.No.76/100-5B) in Sy.No.283,288/3,303/1,303/3, situated at Geetha Nagar, Ward No.76, Kallur Village fields, Kurnool City within the limits of 2nd respondent Kurnool Municipal Corporation, Kurnool District, inspite of my representations dated.01-01-2025,which is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act and violation of Articles 14,19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondents 2 and 3 to take action on my representations dated. 01-01-2025 and remove the illegal construction being made by the 4th respondent in the subject house

¶55

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶56

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 2 and 3 to consider my representation dated. 01-01-2025, which was made against the illegal construction made by the 4th respondent contrary to the sanctioned plan by encroaching the Irrigation Canal forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition

¶57

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶58

1.CHALLA SIVASANKAR

¶59

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶60

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In

¶61

2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶62

5

¶63

HN, J W.P.Nos.8433 and 8556 _2025

¶64

The Court made the following Common Order:

¶65

The petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not taking action against the alleged encroachment by respondent No.4 on the irrigation land. In that regard, the petitioners submitted a representations dated 01.01.2025, which was not considered by the respondent authorities.

¶66

On written instructions, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the Tahsildar, Kallur Mandal, was requested to depute a surveyor for ascertain the encroachment, if any, by respondent No.4 and also to submit a report along with a sketch for further action. It is submitted that the report of the Tahsildar is awaited. It is further submitted that upon receipt of the said report and sketch, appropriate action shall be taken against respondent No.4, subject to any encroachment by the said respondent.

¶67

Recording the same, both the writ petitions are closed. It is needless to mention that the concerned respondent shall take action against the respondent No.4 regarding the encroachment, if any, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of the receipt of the report. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶68

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶69

___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶70

Date:08.09.2025 NKA

¶71

6

¶72

HN, J W.P.Nos.8433 and 8556 _2025

¶73

204