Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Pothamsetti Veera Venkata ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 March, 2022
Bench: Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
W.P.No.6793 of 2022
ORDER:-
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India for the following relief/s:
"... to issue Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent
No.2 in not considering the objections (legal notice) dated
09.03.2022 got issued by the petitioner requesting the authority to
order enquiry in respect of house site of an extent of 1558.33
square yards or 1309 sq mts in survey No.32/1, situated at
Aganampudi Village, Gajuwaka Mandal within the limits of
Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation and to cancel the
building approval plan dated 10.01.2022 vide permit
No.1086/5838/B/Z6/SDA/2021 issued in favour of 5th
respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural
justice and consequently directing the respondents to consider the
said request of the petitioner at an early date and stop the
construction undertaken by the 5th respondent in the said site and
pass such other order or orders ..."
2. The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the
respondents in not passing appropriate orders on the legal notice
issued to the petitioner herein dated 09.03.2022.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
Sri S. Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing
for respondent No.2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
submitted a legal notice dated 09.03.2022 to the respondent No.2.
But the same is kept pending. He further submits that respondent
No.6 filed O.S.No.115 of 2016 for Permanent Injunction on the file
of the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka,
Visakhapatnam restraining the petitioner and his agents from
interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property. The
said suit was dismissed on merits and no appeal has been filed by
respondent No.6 and it has become final. But without considering
the same, the respondent authorities have issued building
permission to the unofficial respondents. Hence, he seeks a
direction to the respondent No.2 to consider the legal notice
(objections) dated 09.03.2022 issued by the petitioner and pass
appropriate orders.
5. Learned standing counsel submits that there is a dispute in
between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents with regard to
title and the Corporation cannot look into the title dispute between
them. He submits that the Corporation cannot dispose of the legal
notice (objections) dated 09.03.2022 and prayed to dismiss the Writ
Petition relying on the judgment of this Court in "Government of
India V. P. Venkatesh1."
6. On the conspectus of the facts and circumstances of the case
and after considering the submissions of both the learned counsel,
this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by
directing the respondent No.2 to pass appropriate orders on the legal
notice (objections) dated 09.03.2022 issued by the petitioner, in
accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of the order.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________
JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Date: 28-03-2022
EPS
2019 (15) SCC 613
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
W.P.No.6793 OF 2022
Date: 28-03-2022
EPS
