Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/26331/2025 of M NEELAKANTA Vs THE STATE OF AP on 17 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 26331/2025 Between: 1. M NEELAKANTA, S/O M. PRABHAKAR AGE31 YEARS, OCCBUSINESS. R/O D. NO. 23-8-83, ROYAL NAGAR,
APHC010505902025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 26331/2025
Between:
1. M
NEELAKANTA,
S/O
M.
PRABHAKAR
AGE31
YEARS,
OCCBUSINESS. R/O D. NO. 23-8-83, ROYAL NAGAR, TIRUPATI
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE
STATE
OF
AP,
REPRESENTED
BY
ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
MUNICIPAL
ADMINISTRATION
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH. 3.
3. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF TIRUPATI, REPRESENTED BY
ITS COMMISSIONER, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...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 topleased pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 3 in not considering the representation dated 16.09.2025 which was addressed complaining about the illegal construction of a structure in the middle of a public road from Tiruchanur to Tirupathi road near the Bharath petrol bunk in Tirupati area as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the repondents No. 3 to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 and to remove the said unauthorized construction and ensure that the public road kept free from all obstruction for the safe use of the petitioner. residents, and devotees situated at Bharath petrol bunk Tiruchanur to Tirupathi road, Tirupathi, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 pleased to direct the respondent no. 3 to consider the representation dated 16.09.2025 addressed complaning about the illegal construction of a structure in the middle of a public road from Tiruchanur to Tirupathi road near the Bharath petrol bunk in Tirupati, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass 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 may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein/respondent No.3 in writ petition No.26331 of 2025 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T OMKAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
The Court made the following:
WRIT PETITION Nos.26331 of 2025
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:
1. Today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submits that the writ petition has been filed without any cause of action and that the averments made therein are false and contrary to the factual position.
3. It is submitted that respondent No.3 has filed a detailed counter stating that the allegation of the petitioner that the illegal construction of the statue of Sankarambadi Sundharachari is causing obstruction to traffic is incorrect. It is further submitted that the statue was erected in coordination with the Traffic Police and with the consent of the local residents. Therefore, there is no truth in the allegation that the erection of the statue amounts to an illegal construction.
4. It is also submitted that the traffic circle constructed by respondent No.3 facilitates the movement of the general public, including pilgrims and vehicular traffic, and also helps in preventing accidents.
5. Considering the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3 and in the absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioner, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the erection of the statue.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N KGM
WRIT PETITION No.26331 of 2025 Date: 18.08.2026
KGM