The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Nunna Keshava Rao
2022 Latest Caselaw 4424 AP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                     &
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

                   W.A Nos. 204 and 212 of 2021
                     (Proceedings through physical mode)


W.A No. 204 of 2021:

The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Govt.,
Municipal Administration Department,
A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Amaravathi, Guntur District and another.                   ..Appellants

         Versus

Nunna Keshava Rao
S/o. Nagabhushana Rao, aged 55 years,
Occ: Business, r/o. Amalapuram,
East Godavari District and others.                         ..Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants : G.P. for Municipal Administration & Urban Development.

Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : Mr. Balaji Medamalli

Counsel for Respondent Nos.7 to 9 : G.P. for Panchayath Raj and Rural Development

Counsel for Respondent No.10 : Mr. Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy, Special Government Pleader

W.A No. 212 of 2021

Godavari Urban Development Authority, Rep.by its Vice Chairman, Kakinada, East Godavari District. ..Appellant

Versus

Nunna Keshava Rao S/o. Nagabhushana Rao, aged 55 years, Occ: Business, r/o. Amalapuram, East Godavari District and others. ..Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy Special Government Pleader

Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : Mr. Balaji Medamalli

Counsel for Respondent Nos.7&9 : G.P. for Municipal Administration & Urban Development.

Counsel for Respondent Nos.8,10&11 : G.P. for Panchayath Raj and Rural Development

COMMON JUDGMENT (ORAL) Dt: 22.07.2022 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Both these writ appeals are directed against the order dated

09.12.2020 in W.P. No.5808 of 2020 passed by the learned single Judge

wherein the issue concerning inclusion of certain hamlets/villages in the

Godavari Urban Development Authority was involved.

2. Learned Advocate General would submit that after the impugned

order was passed by the learned single Judge, the Godavari Urban

Development Authority has been divided into two separate Urban

Development Authorities i.e., Kakinada Urban Development Authority

and Rajahmundry Urban Development Authority. In this view of the

matter, learned Advocate General would submit that the factual

foundation in the cause agitated before the writ court is not in existence,

therefore, the proceedings of the writ appeals may be closed leaving

open the principles on the basis of which the learned single Judge has

rendered verdict, to be decided in appropriate proceedings.

3. In view of the statement made, the writ appeals are closed

leaving open the legal issues and the interpretations of the provisions

contained in Andhra Pradesh (Metropolitan Region and Urban

Development Authorities) Act, 2016, which have been dealt with by the

learned single Judge, for adjudication in appropriate proceedings.

4. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

GM

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

W.A Nos. 204 and 212 of 2021 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Dt: 22.07.2022

GM