Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/23484/2025 of Sadalla Praveena, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 4 August 2026
APHC010462612025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 23484/2025 Between: 1. SADALLA PRAVEENA,, D/O LATE APPA RAO, AGED 32
HN, J
W.P.No.23484_2025
APHC010462612025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 23484/2025
Between:
1. SADALLA PRAVEENA,, D/O LATE APPA RAO, AGED 32 YEARS, R/O
D.NO.31-50-108/13, DOCKYARD COLONY, GHUNGLAM VILLAGE, SHEELA NAGAR, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
MUNICIPAL
ADMINISTRATION
AND
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION (GVMC), VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TOWN PLANNING, GREATER
VISAKHAPATNAM
MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION
(GVMC),
VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH
4. GANDHAM SIMHACHALAM NAIDU, SON OF PARAMESWARA
NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHINA
GANGAVARAM VILLAGE, TENUGUPUDI POST, DEVARAPALLI
MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
5. CHALLA APPALA NAIDU, SON OF NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHINA
GANGAVARAM VILLAGE, TENUGUPUDI POST, DEVARAPALLI
MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
HN, J
W.P.No.23484_2025
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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order. or direction, declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in considering or granting building permission/municipal plan in favor of the 4th respondent under Application No. 1086/0094/B/Z8/C DA/2025 and the 5th respondent under Application No. 1086/0095/B/Z8/CDA/2025 with respect to the schedule property is a vacant land admeasuring 167 square yards or 139.633 square meters, covered by S.No.79/4A and 4F, Old S.No.79/IP, bearing Plot No.23, situated at Chinamushidiwada Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India consequentially to direct the 2nd, and 3rd respondents not to sanction or approve any building permission or municipal plan in respect of a vacant land admeasuring 167
square yards or 139.633 square meters, covered by S.No.79/4A and 4F, Old S.No.79/IP, bearing Plot No.23, situated at Chinamushidiwada Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of O.S. 70/2025
and O.S. 79/2025 before the civil courts at Visakhapatnam 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 2nd and 3rd respondents not to sanction or approve any building permission or municipal plan under Application No.
1086/0094/B/Z8/CDA/2025 and the 5th respondent under Application No.
1086/0095/B/Z8/CDA/2025 in respect of schedule property is a vacant land admeasuring 167 square yards or 139.633 square meters, covered by S.No.79/4A & 4F, Old S.No.79/IP, bearing Plot No.23, situated at Chinamushidiwada Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of O.S. 70/2025 and O.S. 79/2025 before the civil courts at Visakhapatnam; pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A.GOURA SANKARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. MAHESH ADAVIVARAPU
2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
HN, J
W.P.No.23484_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. The present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to grant any building permission in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5, pending consideration of O.S Nos. 70 of 2025 and 79 of 2025 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge at Visakhapatnam.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has right and title over the suit schedule properties and that respondent Nos.4 and 5 have no right or title over the same. However, they have approached respondent Nos.2 and 3 by submitting fabricated documents and are in the process of obtaining building permission.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on receipt of written instructions, submits that the application for grant of building permission was submitted by respondent No.4 through the APDPMS portal by paying the requisite fee and also submitting the requisite documents. It is also submitted that respondent No.5 also submitted a similar application and permission was granted for construction. The complaint submitted by the petitioner pertaining to the permissions granted by the respondent authorities, it is submitted that respondent No.2 is not a party defendant in the pending suits and that there are no orders of the Court furnished by the petitioner restraining or injuncting the respondent No.2 from granting permission. It is also stated that, in the event that the permission was granted by submitting fabricated or false documents, appropriate action for revocation of the
HN, J W.P.No.23484_2025 permission shall be taken by the respondent authorities. It is submitted that the building permission was sanctioned after verifying the documents submitted by respondent Nos.4 and 5.
4. Recording the submissions, the present writ petition stands disposed off, leaving it open for the petitioner to adjudicate his grievances against the unofficial respondents before the appropriate Civil Court in the pending civil suits. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N NKA
Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No
HN, J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 23484 of 2025 Date: 05.08.2026
NKA