Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/27061/2026 of KORADA SRIDHAR Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 18 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] SATURDAY, THE 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 27061/2026 Between: 1. KORADA SRIDHAR, S/O. KORADA CHANDRA BHUSHANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC
APHC010498012026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
SATURDAY, THE 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO: 27061/2026
Between:
1. KORADA SRIDHAR, S/O. KORADA CHANDRA BHUSHANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.PLOT NO.150, SAL
RAMA VETNERY COLONY, VISALAKSHI NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT- 530043.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
MA
AND
UD
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237.
2. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS COMMISSIONER, TENNETI BHAVAN, ASILMETTA, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 530002.
3. THE CHIEF CITY PLANNER, THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM
MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION
ZONE-II
VISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 530002.
4. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER, TOWN PAINNING WING, ZONE-II THE
GREATER
VISAKHAPATNAM
MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION
MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT - 530048.
5. THE ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER, THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM
DISTRICT - 530048
...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 Mandamous declaring the action of the Respondents and their staff
in trying to demolish the Petitioner's Building i.e, to an extent of 125 sq. yards out of 250 sq.yards of Plot No-453, Of LP No.108/75, Sy.No. 139/1, 141/1, 143/2, and 156/1, of Chinnagadili Village, at Visalakshi Nagar, Division No.09, Zone-II, G.V.M.C., Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District inspite of pending Application No.
BPS2025NSPNSP/9/067869,
vide
Transaction
ID
No.320ff03a02df2507b99d
dated.11.03.2026
submitted
under
Building
Penalization
Scheme
(BPS)-2025
pursuant
to
G.O.Ms.No.225
dated.12.11.2025 against approved building permission vide Permit order No.1086/1458/B/Z2/CLI/2025
dated.04.11.2025
without
following
the
procedure under law as wholly is illegal, arbitrary, Unconstitutional and violative of Articles14 and 300-A of Constitution of India and also contrary to the procedure contemplated under the AP Municipalities Act,1965 and consequently to direct the Respondents
and
their
staff
not
to
demolish/interfere of the Petitioner's Building i.e, to an extent of 125 sq yards out of 250 sq.yards of Plot No-453, Of LP No.108/75, Sy.No. 139/1, 141/1, 143/2, and 156/1, of Chinnagadili Village, at Visalakshi Nagar, Division No.09, Zone-II, G.V.M.C., Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 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 direct the Respondents and their staff not to demolish/interfere of the Petitioner's Building i.e, to an extent of 125 sq. yards out of 250 sq.yards of Plot No-453, Of LP No.108/75, Sy.No.139/1, 141/1, 143/2, & 156/1, of Chinnagadili Village, at Visalakshi Nagar, Division No.09, Zone-II, G.V.M.C., Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition IA NO: 2 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 direct the Respondents to consider/process Petitioner's application bearing No.BPS2025NSP/VSP/9/067869, vide Transaction ID
No.320ff03a02df2507b99d
dated.11.03.2026
submitted
under
Building
Penalization
Scheme
(BPS)-2025
in
terms
of
G.O.Ms.No.225
dated.12.11.2025 pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SHAIK MEERAVALI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP)
The Court made the following:
WRIT PETITION NO:27061 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 Shaik Meeravali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 5.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the action of the respondents and their staff in trying to demolish the petitioner's building in Plot No.453, of LP.No.108/75, Sy.No.139/1, 141/1, 143/2 and 156/1 of Chinnagadili Village, at Visalakshi Nagar, Division No.09, Zone-II, G.V.M.C., Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District without following due process of law.
3. It is contended that the petitioner is a developer of the subject property. Pursuant to the Development Agreement-cum-GPA, the petitioner applied for building permission on 08.05.2025 for construction of a residential building and the same was approved by respondent Corporation vide Permit Order No.1086/1458/BZ2/CLI/2025 dated 04.11.2025 and completed the construction of the building. The petitioner contends that the petitioner had raised two additional floors over and above the permitted approval. It is contended that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.225, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department dated 12.11.2025, introducing the Building Penalization Scheme (BPS) – 2025. In terms of the said G.O.Ms.No.225, the petitioner made an online application on 11.03.2026 seeking regularization of the deviations. Despite the same being pending for consideration, the respondents and their staff visited the premises on 17.09.2026 and 18.09.2026 and directed the petitioner to demolish the additional floor raised by the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents not to demolish the building.
4. Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 5 points out from the material papers that the petitioner had applied for building permission on 08.05.2025, whereas the G.O., provides for a cut-off date which is 31.08.2025, prescribing that buildings which have been constructed after 01.01.1985 and before 31.08.2025 are only eligible for regularization of constructions constructed unauthorisedly and in deviation of the sanctioned plan. In order to claim the benefits of the said scheme, the construction of the building should have been completed before 31.08.2025.
5. In the light of the above, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has already filed an application for regularization, whether the Building Penalization Scheme applies to the case of the petitioner or not would be examined only when the said application is taken up for consideration, however, the present grievance of the petitioner is that pending consideration of the said regularization application, the respondents are taking coercive measures for demolition of the unauthorized structure, and any such action pending consideration of the regularization would cause prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the view that, if any decision is taken by the respondents to reject the petitioner’s application for regularization, considering that the principles of natural justice, must be complied with before any coercive action is proposed against any person, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to issue notice to the petitioner before taking any coercive action against the petitioner for removal of unauthorized structures, and provide an opportunity to submit his case. Without following such due process of law, the 2nd respondent Corporation is directed not to take any coercive measures against the petitioner.
6. 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: 19.09.2026 ANI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO:27061 of 2026
Dated:19.09.2026
ANI