Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
A Bhagyamma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 13 December, 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
WRIT PETITION No. 39721 of 2022
JUDGMENT:-
Heard Sri T.C.Krishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Sri P. Anand Surya learned counsel representing Sri K
Suresh Kumar Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd
respondent, Tirupati Municipal Corporation and learned
Government Pleader for Municipal Administration, who
accepted notice for the 1st respondent.
2. Sri. Munireddy, learned Standing Counsel, accepted notice
for the 2nd respondent. With the consent of the leaned counsels
for the parties, the petition is being disposed of finally at this
stage.
3. Sri. P. Anand Surya submits that he has received written
instructions and the writ petition may be disposed of and in
view of the instructions received, there is no need to file
counter-affidavit.
4. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India has been filed for the following relief:-
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or
direction more particularly one in the nature of
writ of Mandamus to declare the acts on the
part of the 3rd respondent in seeking to
formation of road into the petitioner's patta
land (now vacant plot) bearing in Sy. No.4/3 for
an extent of Ac. 0.22.28 cents out of Ac. 0.28
cents situated at No.29, Tiruapti Village
Accounts, Tirupati Urban, without notice and
without following due process of law amount to
erroneous, arbitrary and violative of Articles
14, 19, 21 and 300(A) of the Constitution of
India besides being unconstitutional and
consequently to direct the respondents 2 and 3
not to interfere in the petitioner's patta land
(now vacant plot) in Sy. No. 4/3 for an extent of
Ac. 0.22.28 cents out of Ac.0.28 cents situated
at No.29, Tirupati Village Accounts, Tirupati
Urban in the interest of Justice.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner along with the others have purchased the land to an
extent of Ac. 0.28 cents in Sy. No. 4/3 situated at No.29,
Tirupati Village Accounts, Tirupati Urban by way of registered
sale deed in Document No. 4173/96 and got registered in the
year 1996 and later on got partitioned on 23.09.2005. He
further submits that staff of the 3rd respondent, the Tirupati
Municipal Corporation on 03.12.2022 made attempts for
formation of road, taking the petitioner's land, without following
any due process of law. Neither any notice was served nor the
said land was acquired. He further submits that without
following the procedure established by law, the petitioner
cannot be deprived of his property which is a right guaranteed
by the Constitution of India under Article 300-A.
On 08.12.2022, the learned standing counsel for the 3rd
respondent was granted time to obtain instructions and today
Sri P. Anand Surya, learned counsel submits that the State
Government have sanctioned 60 feet wide Masterplan Road
from the existing road, besides the Hero Honda show room on
Tirupati-Renigunta road upto the limits of Tirupati Municipal
Corporation, towards south at Padmavathipuram area. The
Municipal Council has also passed resolution vide C.R.No. 73
dated 01.10.2022 for the proposed Development of the road
and for that purpose, the 3rd respondent only marked alignment
of the land for the road development on 03.12.2022. He further
submits that a notice was issued to the petitioner vide Roc. No.
729/2022/G1 dated 25-10-2022 informing that the petitioner's
site is getting affected in the Masterplan Road and requested to
furnish the documents. The petitioner did not receive the
notice, a copy of which was then affixed on the compound wall
of the petitioner's rented house. He further submits that in
taking the petitioner's property for the said purpose, the
respondents will follow the due process of law.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has disputed the service
of notice dated 25.10.2022 but submits that in view of the
stand taken by the respondents that they will follow due process
of law, the petitioner's grievance shall be redressed.
7. In view of the specific stand taken by the 3rd respondent as
noted above that they will follow the due process of law in
taking the petitioner's property for forming the Masterplan
Road, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the writ
petition pending. Therefore this writ petition is being disposed of
with the following directions:-
(i) The respondents shall not take the petitioner's
subject property or any part thereof for the purpose
of forming road without following the due process of
law.
(ii) The 3rd respondent shall serve a notice Roc. No.
729/2022/G1 dated 25.10.2022 afresh on the
petitioner and the petitioner is at liberty to submit
the reply, if any.
8. No order as to costs.
Consequently, the Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending
in this writ petition shall stand closed.
__________________________
RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
Date: 13.12.2022
Issue cc in three (3) days.
(B.O)
Psr
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
(Disposed of)
WRIT PETITION No. 39721 of 2022
Date: 13.12.2022
Psr
