Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/23390/2026 of Neeli Srinivaa Rao, Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 21 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 23390/2026 Between: 1. NEELI SRINIVAA RAO,, OCC BUSINESS S/O. SURYANAJAYANA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O.
APHC010430502026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO: 23390/2026
Between:
1. NEELI SRINIVAA RAO,, OCC BUSINESS S/O. SURYANAJAYANA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O. D.NO. 18-507, PEDHAGADILI, WARD-12, VISAKAPATNAM, AP.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238.
2. THE GRATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP.
BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530003.
3. THE
ZONAL
COMMISSIONER,
EAST
ZONE,
GREATER
VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VISAKHAPATNAM -
530003.
4. NEELI SATYANARAYANA, S/O. LATE NARA N AGED.YA AGE 58
YEARS, RIO. FLAT NO. 201, CLASSIC TOWERS, VETERINARY
COLONY, VISALAKSHINAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530043.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the proceedings vide R.C.No.
05090/2026/East Zone /Rev, Dt. 10.06.2026 as issued by Respondent No-3
as arbitrary, in excess of powers conferred under a statutory act and consequently set aside the same IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased suspend the proceedings vide R.C.No. 05090/2026/East Zone /Rev, Dt.
10.06.2026, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
2. CKR ASSOCIATES
The Court made the following:
WRIT PETITION NO:23390 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
Heard Sri Sudhakara Rao Ambati, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the proceedings dated 10.06.2026 issued by the 3rd respondent.
3. It is contended that the 3rd respondent Corporation issued proceedings dated 10.06.2026, requiring the petitioner to produce certain documents as mentioned therein. After the said notice, the petitioner issued a legal notice to the respondents challenging their jurisdiction in issuing the impugned notice; however, to that notice, the documents required by the Corporation vide the impugned notice were annexed.
4. The unofficial respondent contends that he has raised a complaint before the 2nd respondent against the petitioner herein as he had fraudulently got his name mutated in Municipal records. Acting on the complaint, the Corporation required the petitioner to produce the title documents. Without participating in the said enquiry, the petitioner has approached this Court. The relief sought in the writ petition is premature.
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents Nos.2 and 3 submits that, based on the unofficial respondents' complaint, they rightly issued the notice to resolve the issues. The petitioner could have participated in the enquiry initiated by the Corporation before approaching this Court.
6. Considered the submissions. The impugned proceedings are notice issued to resolve the dispute raised by the unofficial respondent. Mere issuance of notice, in the absence of patent lack of jurisdiction, does not warrant interference by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Having regard to the same, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to participate in the enquiry initiated by the 2nd respondent Corporation, pursuant to the impugned notice dated 10.06.2026, by submitting the documents as per the said notice, if the same has not yet already been submitted. Upon the same, the 2nd respondent Corporation is directed to pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the unofficial respondent. Till passing of the final orders on the said notice, no coercive measures shall be taken.
7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Dated: 22.09.2026 ANI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO:23390 of 2026
Dated:22.09.2026
ANI