Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/21580/2026 of Chilaka Honey Gladen Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 12 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 21580/2026 Between: 1. CHILAKA HONEY GLADEN, D/O. LATE CHILAKA KISHORE, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
APHC010377982026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO: 21580/2026
Between:
1. CHILAKA HONEY GLADEN, D/O. LATE CHILAKA KISHORE, AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.1-21, KROSURU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
SOCIAL
WELFARE
DEPARTMENT,
A.P.
SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
- 522237.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR/CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT SCHEDULE
CASTES SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., PALNADU
DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET - 522601.
3. THE
EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR,
SC
CORPORATION,
NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522601.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, KROSURU MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT -
522410.
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KROSURU MANDAL, PALNADU
DISTRICT - 522410.
6. DUDDULA
MURALI
KRISHNA,
S/O.
NOT
KNOW
TO
THE
PETITIONER, R/O. KROSURU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PALNADU
DISTRICT - 522410.
...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 an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not handing over possession of Shop No.5 situated in the SC Shopping Complex, Krosuru, Palnadu District, to the petitioner, despite eviction of the unauthorized occupants pursuant to the proceedings of the District Collector and despite the petitioners representation, as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of Articles 14, 19(l)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith hand over vacant and peaceful possession of Shop No.5 to the petitioner 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 to direct the respondents not to allot Shop No.5 to any third party; to maintain status quo regarding the shop and to consider handing over interim possession to the petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. RAMESH BABU NELATURI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. GANDRALA RATHNA KUMAR SC For APSCCFC LTD
3. GP FOR REVENUE
4. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
The Court made the following:
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 Ramesh Babu Nelaturi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondent No.1 and Sri Gandrala Rathna Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is against the action of the respondents in not handing over possession of Shop No.5 situated in SC Shopping Complex, Krosuru, Palnadu District, to the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to forthwith hand over the same.
3. It is contended that the petitioner’s father was allotted the subject shop in the year 1990. Since the date of demise of the petitioner’s father on 18.12.2020, the petitioner has been in occupation and she has been conducting the business from the same shop for her livelihood. However, the 6th respondent, taking advantage of her feeble position, had encroached into the subject shop and occupied the same. On account of the several representations made by the petitioner, and pursuant to the directions of the 2nd respondent dated 27.10.2025, the 6th respondent vacated the subject shop on 01.11.2025. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to reallot the subject shop in her favour.
4. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent has placed before the Court a copy of the instructions received by him in the case. It has been contended that the petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot seek permission for allotment of the subject shop, claiming hereditary rights.
5. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file a representation seeking redressal of her grievance before the authority within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Upon such representation, the 3rd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law within eight (8) weeks, thereafter.
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: 13.08.2026 ANI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT PETITION NO:21580 of 2026
Dated: 13.08.2026
ANI