Ramisetty Suresh vs The State Of Ap
2022 Latest Caselaw 9888 AP

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

                   WRIT PETITION No. 37556 of 2022

JUDGMENT:

1. Heard Sri Y.Soma Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development

Authority representing respondent No.1 and Sri G.Naresh Kumar, learned

counsel representing respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2-

Special Officer/Joint Collector, Tadepalligudem Municpality and respondent No.3-

Commissioner, Tadepalligudem Municpality, were making efforts to demolish the

petitioner's shop situated at Door No.1-3-5, Kadakatta Gate, Rajivgandhi Road,

Kadakatta, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, situated in an extent of 176

1/3 yards, R.S.No.190/4A of Tadepalligudem Village is contrary to law and

violation of principles of natural justice and consequently the Writ Petition was

filed.

3. This Court on 23.11.2022 while granting time to the learned counsel for

the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to obtain instructions posted the matter for today

and providing that till such time, no coercive action shall be taken with respect to

the subject property except in accordance with law.

4. Sri G.Naresh Kumar, representing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on the basis of

the written instructions submits that the building is located at the proposed road

of 33' wide road at East side of the layout (West side of the plot No.76 & 77),

which does not fall in the approved layout L.P.No.237/82. He further submits

that the surrounding plot owners approached the office of the Municipality on

17.11.2022 and requested to connect the proposed road by taking action on the

said building which falls in the proposed road. The petitioner obtained the

building permission dated 14.05.2018 through online which is still in scrutiny.

5. He further submits that neither the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 nor their staff

issued any notice to the petitioner nor has taken any action with respect to the

subject property. He further submits that the authorities, if necessary would take

action only in accordance with law, after conducting the survey.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the stand taken

by the corporation as submitted by the learned counsel representing respondent

Nos. 2 and 3, the petitioner grievance would be met, if the respondents proceed

only in accordance with law.

7. Learned counsels for the parties submits that the Writ Petition may be

disposed of.

8. Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties the

present Writ Petition is being disposed of finally, after recording the stand of the

Municipalities as aforesaid providing that the petitioner's shop shall not be

demolished, except by following the due process of law by the authorities.

9. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.

RAVI NATH TILHARI, J Date: 28.12.2022 MH THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION No. 37556 of 2022

28.12.2022

MH