Yeleswarapu Hanuma Kumari vs The State Of Ap
2023 Latest Caselaw 963 AP

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

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

                          WRIT APPEAL No.245 of 2023
                                  (Through physical mode)

Yeleswarapu Hanuma Kumari,
W/o. Narayana Murthy,
Aged about 51 yrs, Occ: Housewife,
R/o. H.No.1-31-11/2, Yedlavalli Street,
Nazerpet, Tenali, Guntur District.
                                                                         .. Appellant

        Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary (M.A. & U.D.)
Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Amaravathi, Guntur District, and others.
                                                                       .. Respondents

ORAL JUDGMENT Dt: 20.02.2023 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

This writ appeal is preferred challenging the order dated 19.12.2022

passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.34274 of 2022, whereby the

learned single Judge has refused to entertain the writ petition preferred by

the appellant herein, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent-

Commissioner, Tenali Municipality, to take appropriate action pursuant to the

notice-cum-provisional order dated 30.12.2021 passed against the 3rd

respondent, for removal of the constructions raised by the 3rd respondent, HCJ & NJS,J

which are said to be illegal and unauthorized being contrary to and in

violation of the sanctioned plan and building permit order dated 27.09.2021.

2. Admittedly, two civil suits are pending on the issue relating to the

matter sought to be agitated in the writ petition. In O.S.No.493 of 2021 filed

by the present appellant/writ petitioner on the file of Principal Junior Civil

Judge, Tenali, she has prayed for permanent injunction restraining the

defendant and her men from making further digging without proper and

adequate ground support and security to the plaint schedule property on the

northern side without proper approved plan of municipal authority and

norms. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent has also filed O.S.No.539 of 2021

on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tenali, for a decree of permanent

injunction restraining the defendants, their men and followers from in any

way interfering with the process of construction of new RCC daba house in

the plaint schedule property. In the said suit filed by the 3rd respondent,

temporary injunction has been allowed in favour of the 3rd respondent vide

order dated 17.09.2021, directing the defendants not to interfere with the

construction of the plaintiff as per her entitlement in the petition schedule

property. Surprisingly, in both the civil suits, the Municipal Corporation has

not been arrayed as a party. Invariably, the interim order passed in the suit

is not binding on the Municipal Corporation.

HCJ & NJS,J

3. In our considered opinion, while relegating the writ petitioner to

pursue the suit proceedings, the learned single Judge has not committed any

such illegality or irregularity warranting our interference in this intra-court

appeal. However, at the same time, we feel that the observation made by

the learned single Judge in para 11 of the order to the effect that the order

passed by the Municipal Corporation can also not be directed to be

implemented, by means of the present writ petition which in view of

pendency of suit proceedings as also the temporary injunction orders, is

considered not to be an appropriate remedy, is not warranted, for the reason

that in both the suits, the concerned Municipal Corporation/Municipality is not

made a party and when a statutory authority has passed an order within it

powers and there is no temporary injunction against the Municipal

Corporation, such an observation is not called for. Accordingly, we direct that

the observation made by the learned single Judge in para 11 of the order

under appeal shall not come in the way of the Municipality to proceed in

accordance with law.

4. With the above direction, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ                              NINALA JAYASURYA, J
                                                                                PSA
                                                                 HCJ & NJS,J

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

WRIT APPEAL No.245 of 2023

(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)

Dt: 20.02.2023

PSA