Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/19928/2019 of Nalla Nagaraju Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY, THE 28th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 19928/2019 Between: 1. NALLA NAGARAJU, S/O LATE AMMIRAJU AGED ABOUT 57 YRS. HINDU, EMPLOYEE R/O H.NO.4-4-93/3,
APHC010414792019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 28th DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 19928/2019
Between:
1. NALLA NAGARAJU, S/O LATE AMMIRAJU AGED ABOUT 57 YRS.
HINDU, EMPLOYEE R/O H.NO.4-4-93/3, KURASALAVARI STREET, AMALAPURAM-533201. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
SECRETARY,
MUNCIPAL
ADMINISTRATION,
SECRETARIAT,
SECRETARIAT,
AMARAVATHI.
VELAGAPUDI-522503.
GUNTUR
DISTRICT.
2. THE AMALAPURAM MUNCIPALITY, REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER
AMALAPAURAM-533201. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
3. NALLA SURYAVATHI, W/O LATE VENKATA RAJARAO AGED
ABOUT 43 YRS. HINDU, HOUSE WIFE R/O H.NO.4-4-45, BUTCHEMMA
AGRAHARAM,
AMALAPURAM-533201.
EAST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
4. MADIREDDY VENKATARAO, S/O NAGESWARARAO AGED ABOUT
40 YRS. HINDU, INAM H.NO.1-188, CHINDADAGARUVU - 533203.
AMALAPURAM MANDAL. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. KALVAKOLANU RAMAKRISHNA, S/O BABURAO AGED ABOUT 45
YRS. HINDU, INAM H.NO.11-3-92, NEAR KANAKADURGA TEMPLE
MOBERLIPETA,AMALAPURAM-533201. EAST GODAVARI 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 toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order of the 2nd respondent vide in ROC.No.23/2018-G1 Dt.26-12-2018 pending determination of civil rights between the petitioner and the respondents 3 to 5 vide in O.S.No.18/2019 on the file of IInd Addl.District Judge court, Amalapuram in respect of the property ie., Ac.0.13 1/2 cents out of Ac.0.33 1/2 cents in R.S.No.505/24, 505/25 and 505/26 situated in Butchemma Agraharam, Amalpauram as illegal, aribitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently cancel the building permission granted infavour of the respondents 4 and 5 and grant IA NO: 1 OF 2019
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 grant interim stay of the orders vide in ROC.No.23/2018-G1 Dt.26-12- 2018
granting building permission infavour fo the respondents 4 and 5 in respect of the property ie., Ac.0.13 1/2 cents out of Ac.0.33 1/2 cents in R.S.No.505/24, 505/25 and 505/26 situated in Butchemma Agraharam, Amalpauram, East Godavari District pending disposal of the main writ petition and grant Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI SC For MUNICIPALITIES
2. K SAIRAM MURTHY
3. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
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:-
The present writ petition is filed challenging the building permission granted in favour of respondents Nos. 3 to 5 vide proceedings dated 26.12.2018. It is submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved by the said proceedings. It is further submitted that the petitioner and respondents Nos. 3 to 5 are contesting their title over the subject property in O.S. No. 108 of 2019 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Amalapuram, wherein an order of injunction is stated to be operating in favour of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner and respondent No. 3 are closely related and the civil dispute between them is presently pending adjudication before the competent Civil Court.
2. It is noticed that, at the stage of admission of the writ petition, no interim order was granted by this Court. It is further informed that no construction has been commenced pursuant to the impugned building permission in view of the pendency of the civil suit.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 submits that the building permission granted in the year 2018 has, in any event, lapsed by efflux of time and that, if respondents Nos. 3 to 5 intend to undertake any construction, they are required to submit a fresh application before the competent authority for grant of building permission in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication in view of the efflux of time, as the period during which the construction was required to be completed has already lapsed. It is, however, made clear that, in the event any fresh building permission is granted in favour of respondents Nos. 3 to 5, the same shall give rise to a fresh cause of action, if available in law, to the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs..
6. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 28.07.2026 RSD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 19928/2019
28.07.2026 RSD