Sai Maheswara Educaional Society vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 484 AP

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

               WRIT PETITION No.1430 of 2023

JUDGMENT:-

1.    Heard Sri Chandu Harsha Vardhana Rao, learned counsel

for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal

Administration for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri P.Anand

Surya, learned counsel, representing Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy

Kalava, learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.3,

Anantapur Municipal Corporation, learned Government Pleader

for Roads and Buildings for the respondent Nos.4 and 6,

learned Government Pleader for Survey and land records for the

respondent No.5 and learned Government Pleader for Home for

the respondent Nos.7 and 8.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this

petition was filed for the relief, directing the respondents not to

initiate demolition of scheduled property situated in RD and

SRD Anantapuram T.S.No.2059 Nearest Door No.13-74m

Kamala Nagar, New Municipal Shopping Complex Second Floor

of 3rd respondent's Corporation, without following the due

process of law with further direction to the respondents to follow

the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act

and the notifications issued by the State as also the judgment

in O.S.No.88 of 2012 dated 01.08.2018.

3. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be against the

initiation of some demolition activity of the subject property.

4. Sri P.Anand Surya, learned counsel, representing Sri

Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned Standing Counsel for the

respondent No.3, Ananthapuram Municipal Corporation and the

learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings for the

respondent Nos.4 and 6 submit that for the road widening the

subject property is effected for which notice dated 29.09.2022

was given to the petitioner, to which the petitioner filed reply on

26.10.2022 and after considering the petitioner's reply the order

dated 18.01.2023 has been passed and consequently the action

of the respondents is by following the due process of law.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these

facts with respect to the notice dated 29.09.2022 and the

explanation dated 26.10.2022 have not been mentioned in the

affidavit in support of the writ petition.

6. He further submits that the work of road widening is

carried by the National Highway Authority of India, which has

not been impleaded as one of the respondents in the writ

petition.

7. He further submits that the copy of the final order dated

18.01.2023 has been received by the petitioner on 24.01.2023

and the petitioner will challenge the same.

8. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the

writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition making all

the necessary averments as also for the appropriate relief.

9. Considering the same, the petitioner is permitted to

withdraw the writ petition with the aforesaid liberty.

10. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed with the liberty as

prayed.

No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any

pending, shall also stand closed.

__________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J Date: 30.01.2023 SCS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION No.1430 of 2023

Date: 30.01.2023

Scs