Anduri Ram Prasad Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2937 AP

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

         HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                   &
                 HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

                           WRIT APPEAL No.499 of 2021
                           (Through Video-Conferencing)

Anduri Ram Prasad Reddy, S/o. Anduri Chinna Bayyapu Reddy,
Aged about 50 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.H.No.E-16-158,
N.G.O. Colony, Kadapa, Y.S.R. Kadapa District                           ... Appellant

                                      Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal
Secretary, Municipal Administration Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District,
Andhra Pradesh State, and others                                    ... Respondents

Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Ch. C. Krishna Reddy

Counsel for respondent No.1 : G.P. for MA & UD

Counsel for respondent No.2 : Mr. K. Suresh Kumar Reddy

Counsel for respondent No.3 : Mr. K.S. Murthy

ORAL JUDGMENT

Dt: 09.08.2021

(Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Heard Mr. Ch. C. Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant.

Also heard Mr. A. Jagannadha Rao, learned Government Pleader

representing Mr. B. Satya Shivaji - learned Government Pleader for Municipal

Administration and Urban Development, for respondent No.1, Mr. K. Suresh

Kumar Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.2 and

Mr. K. S. Murthy, learned counsel for respondent No.3.

This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 19.10.2020 passed

by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.332 of 2020 dismissing the writ petition.

The plot of land in Sy.No.82/1B and 751 of Chinnachowk village, Kadapa

District, was allotted in favour of N.G.G.O. Cooperative Building Society

Limited, Kadapa by G.O.Ms.No.956, Revenue (Q) Department, dated

22.08.1970. It is stated in the writ petition that the layout plan was approved HCJ & NJS,J

by Chinnachowk Gram Panchayat. Ac.0.41 cents was left for religious purposes

and respondent No.3 was raising construction of an apartment in the said site.

With the above foundational facts, building permission granted by

respondent Nos.2 and 3 on 22.11.2019 was called into question.

A perusal of the order of the learned single Judge goes to show that

arguments were advanced that building permission could not have been issued

in the personal name of respondent No.3, an individual, as the land was

allotted to a society. It is to be noted that the writ petitioner is not a member

of the society. Learned single Judge observed that building plan was approved

and sanctioned in the name of respondent No.3 as the present President of the

Cooperative Building Society. It was also observed that subsequently, Urban

Development Authority had appropriately corrected the building permission by

granting the permission in the name of "the President, Kadapa District NGOs

Co-operative Building Society Ltd., Kadapa".

The learned single Judge further observed that wife of the writ

petitioner had filed a suit in respect of the very same subject matter stating

the place where the building was sought to be constructed as a parking place,

which is at variance with the plea taken in the writ petition that the same was

meant for religious purposes, and that when no interim order was granted in

the suit, writ petition came to be filed.

In the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 in the writ petition, it was

specifically stated that there was no approved lay out as pleaded by the writ

petitioner.

In view of the above discussion, we find no good ground to interfere with

the order of the learned single Judge and, accordingly, the writ appeal is

dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,

shall stand closed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ                                   NINALA JAYASURYA, J
MRR