Potu Koteswara Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2128 AP

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

               WRIT PETITION No.9915 of 2023

JUDGMENT:-

1.    Heard Sri K. Vijaya Raju, learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal

Administration for the respondent No.1 and Sri G. Naresh

Kumar, learned counsel, representing Sri M. Manohar Reddy,

learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned

Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondent No.3.

2. For the order proposed to be passed issuance of notice to

the unofficial respondent No.4 is dispensed with.

3. With the consent of the parties counsels, the writ petition

is being disposed of finally at this stage.

4. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been filed for the following relief:-

"I therefore pray the Hon'ble Court that it may be pleased to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 not protecting the Road an extent of Ac. 0.03 cents situated in Sy.No. 523 of Gurazala Town and not taking action against the 4th respondent for illegal encroaching of Government land as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 protect the Road

situated in Sy.No. 523 of Gurazala Village and take appropriate action against 4th respondent for encroaching Government land and pass necessary orders or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

5. Sri K. Vijay Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the respondent No.4 is raising construction on the

public land/road situated in Sy.No.523 of Gurazala Town by

making encroachment, but inspite of the petitioner approaching

the authorities no action is being taken. He submits that

previously also the same respondent made encroachment and

upon the representation of the petitioner, the authorities

protected that land, but again on 01.04.2023, the respondent

No.4 has made the encroachment.

6. As the matter pertains to the encroachment and

construction on the public road as alleged, the petitioner has

the remedy, at the first instance, to approach the respondent

Nos.2 and 3 by filing appropriate representation/application

bringing said fact to the notice of the authorities and seek

redressal. The petitioner without first approaching the

Competent Authorities, has directly approached this Court for a

Writ of Mandamus.

7. Consequently, the writ petition is being disposed of

directing the petitioner to approach the respondent Nos.2 and 3

or such other competent authority as may be considered

appropriate, by filing appropriate application/representation,

upon which the respondent Nos.2 and 3, the Competent

Authority shall look into the matter and take appropriate

decision/action in accordance with law, with due opportunity of

hearing to the respondent No.4 as well.

8. Writ petition is disposed of finally with the aforesaid

observations and directions.

No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,

shall also stand closed.

__________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J Date: 20.04.2023 SCS FFFFFFFFFHGHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGFFFKKKKKKKKKK KKKKJJJJJKFDASDFKKKKLKKLHGGGFFFFFFFDSSSSSGG GGGGGGHHHHHGHFSDAFSDAHLFJHSDFJASD

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION No.9915 of 2023

Date: 20.04.2023

Scs