Sunday, 10, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Edala Veerraju, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8785 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8785 AP
Judgement Date : 16 November, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Edala Veerraju, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 November, 2022
 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

                WRIT PETITION No.6803 OF 2016

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India for the following relief:

"To issue a writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the officials respondents in not initiating any action qua the installation of statue of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar on the road margin of R&B road, leading to Mandapeta from Alamuru near Bus stand of Gummileru Village, Alamuru Mandal, East Godavari against the un official respondents and others, is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the G.O.MS.No. 55, Transport, Roads and Buildings (R.1), Department, dt.8- 4-2003 and Art 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to permit erection/installation of statue of Dr. B. R. Ambebkar or any other statue on the road margin of R&B road, near the Bus stand of Gummileru Village, Alamuru Mandal, East Godavari District and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper."

2. The contention of the petitioners herein is that the

subject statue was erected without obtaining any permission

from the concerned authorities and contrary to the orders of the

Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s) 8519 of

2006 dated 18.01.2013 passed in I.A.No.10 of 2012, and basing

on the said order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Government has

issued G.O.Ms.No.18, Transport, Roads & Buildings (Roads-1)

Department, dated 18.02.2013, and decided not to grant

permission for installation of any statue or construction or any

structure on public roads, pavements, sideways and any other

public utility places and it is directed all the State Level and

District Level Officers mentioned therein to ensure strict

compliance of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court.

3. This Court has issued notices to the respondents and

Sri P.V.S.A.Rama Murthy, learned counsel, appeared on behalf

of respondent Nos.7 to 11 and he would submit that the

installation of the subject statue was not on the road margin, as

directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court or as mentioned in

G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 18.02.2003 and some other statues are

there in the same place and that he will file an application to the

2nd respondent-District Collector seeking permission basing

upon the G.O.Ms.No.18 dated 18.02.2003 and the same may be

considered by the 2nd respondent-District Collector in

accordance with law and till such time, prayed to protect the

interest.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 6, denying

the contentions made by the respondents 7 to 11, would submit

that without obtaining any permission, any statue cannot be

installed on public roads or road margins or pavements, even

assuming that it is not a road margin and still it is a public place

and prayed to direct the respondents 7 to 11 to remove the

statue.

5. In view of the contentions of the learned counsel for

both sides, this Court is inclined to direct the respondents 7 to

11 to make an application to the 2nd respondent-District

Collector within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order and, on receiving such an application from the

respondents 7 to 11, the 2nd respondent-District Collector shall

pass appropriate orders, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble

Apex Court referred to supra and the G.O.Ms.No.18 dated

18.02.2003, by giving notices to the petitioners herein and an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as the

respondents 7 to 11, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the

date of such application. Till such time, status quo shall be

maintained by both the parties with regard to the subject statue.

6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ

Petition.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 16.11.2022 siva

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION No.6803 OF 2016

Date: 16.11.2022

siva

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter