WP/21971/2026 of KANDETI JEEVAN KUMAR Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 4 August 2026

1. KANDETI JEEVAN KUMAR, S/O. KANDETI CHITTI BABU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RIO. JANARDHAN REDDY COLONY, GUDUR, NELLORE DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINICPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUIDLINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH 222-

2. THE GUDUR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. X24 RO I

3. KESARLA SUKUMAR, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RIO. D.NO. 9-159, PELLATI VANI STREET, G.S. RAYULU SATRARN, BAZAR STREET, GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE CISTRICT.

...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 to issue a writ, Direction, Order or Orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of a Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd a respondent in attempting to demolish the foundation laid by the petitioner for v, construcUon of shop to an extent of 18 Anlcanams in Sy.No. 576-A, without following t1 j the due procedure of law is illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, Contrary to the directions of this

Honble Court passed in W.P.No. 31758 of 2025, violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2ndrespondent not to demolish the foundation laid by the petitioner for construction of shop to an extent of 18 Ankanams in Sy.No. 576-A, without following due procedure established under law 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 Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. NAVULURU KRISHNA SAI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following Order:-

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to restrain the 2nd respondent from demolishing the structures/foundation laid by the petitioner for construction of shops over an extent of 18 Ankanams in Survey No.576-A, without following due process of law.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent is acting contrary to the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.31758 of 2025. It is, however, submitted that the petitioner is not in possession of the said extent of land and that the land in question forms part of the road margin, over which the petitioner now intends to construct shops. In W.P.No.31758 of 2025, by order dated 11.11.2025, this Court recorded the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality that the Municipality was in the process of removing the encroachments on the road margin.

3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the encroachment on the road margin has been identified and will be removed in accordance with the directions of this Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no title or right over the subject property and, therefore, cannot claim any equity.

4. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for both sides, this Court finds no ground to interfere and the petitioner has not made any case for granting any relief for occupying land on the road margin

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

6. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 05.08.2026 RSD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

WRIT PETITION NO: 21971/2026

05.08.2026 RSD