Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/14429/2026 of Thodeti Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 21 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No: 14429 of Between: 1. THODETI VIJAY KUMAR, S/o.VARAPRASADA RAO, AGED 70 YEARS, R/o. DOOR No.3
APHC010252452026
IN THE H
(
MONDAY, TH
TWO T
THE HONOURAB
WRIT
Between:
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.
1. THODETI VIJAY KU YEARS, R/o. DOOR VILLAGE, VIJAYAWA
2. THODETI JAYA RAJ YEARS, R/o. D.No. APARTMENT, ANDH AJITH SINGH NAGAR
3. THODETI BENZMEN NO.2-48, VIJAYAWAD 520012.
4. THODETI VIJAY K R/o. DOOR No.2-48, V DISTRICT-520012.
1. THE STATE OF PANCHAYAT AND VELAGAPUDI VILLA PRINCIPAL SECRET
2. THE DISTRICT COL
3. THE SUB COLLECT
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) E TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURY PETITION No: 14429 of 2026 UMAR, S/o.VARAPRASADA RAO, A R No.3-36, NEAR BUS STOP, AMB ADA RURAL, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT U, S/o.VARAPRASADA RAO (LATE), 43-106/1-5A/1, FLAT No.505, BOMM HRA PRABHA COLONY, NANDAMUR R, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT - 5200 , S/o. SAMSON, AGED 44 YEARS, R DA RURAL, AMBAPURAM, KRISHNA D KUMAR, S/o.SAMSON, AGED
VIJAYAWADA RURAL, AMBAPURAM, ...PETIT AND ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTM RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECR AGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238, RE TARY. LECTOR, NTR DISTRICT-521001 TOR, NTR DISTRICT- 521001
YA AGED 70 BAPURAM -520012. AGED 58 MARILLU-2 I NAGAR,
015. R/o. DOOR DISTRICT- YEARS, KRISHNA TIONER(S) MENT OF RETARIAT, EP. BY ITS
4. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, PVS EMPIRE, D.No. 12-47, 3RD FLOOR, PATHURU ROAD, BESIDE RELIANCE DIGITALS, TADEPALLI VILLAGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522501
5. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 521001
6. THE TAHSILDAR, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT.520001
7. MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA RURAL, NTR DISTRICT.52001
8. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, AMABAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT,
VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT.520015
9. ANDHRA PRADESH CAPITAL REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OFFICE, , OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION APCRDA PROJECT OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, RAYAPUDI POST, TULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237.
10. AMBAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY AMBAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA RURAL, NTR DISTRICT.
11. KUNDETI DEVADASU, S/O RAGHAVULU (LATE), AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
R/O D.NO.1-19, C.S.I CHURCH, AMBAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT - 520012.
12. KUNDETI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O DEVADASU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-56, AMBAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT- 520012.
13. KUNDETI CHITTI BABU, S/O DEVADASU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-19, AMBAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA RURAL MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT – 520012.
14. SRK TOWNSHIP GUNTUR, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MANDALAPU FLANUMANTHA RAO 5 TH S/O KODANDAIAH, AGE 47 YEARS, O/O 20-1-34, FLOOR, J.R.R COMPLEX LOTUS LAND MARK, AYODYANAGAR, VIJAYAWADA- 52000L NTR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. Mr.ARUN SHOWRI G Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. YARRAGUNTLA KOTESWARA RAO, STANDING COUNSEL FOR ZILLA PRAJA PARISHADS, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHADS AND GRAM PANCHAYAT
The Court made the following Order:
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners. Also heard Smt. S.Pranathi, learned counsel representing respondent No.9.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“…..to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action of respondent No.9 in entertaining and processing the application for layout approval submitted by respondent No.14 in respect of the land in R.S.No.52/1A and 52/1B2 of Ambapuram Village, Vijayawada Rural Mandal, as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct respondents 5, 7 and 8, to refrain from granting any layout approval, development permission, sub-divisions, or mutations in favour of respondents 11 to 13 pending final disposal of O.S.No.14 of 2026 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada and pass such other order or orders…..”
3. With the consent of counsel on both sides, the matter is disposed of by way of the following order:
4. The petitioners’ claim that they are absolute owners of land of an extent of Ac.1.04 cents in Survey Nos.52/1A, 52/1B2 of Ambapuram Village. They trace out their title to the said land to their grandfather one late Mr.Tholeti Vara Prasad Rao and a Registered Sale Deed vide Document No.2518/1966 stated to have been executed by one Thodeti Ashiravadam to their grandfather. Their grievance is that under the guise of some void and illegal documents, respondent No.14 forcibly trespassed into the said land in July, 2025 and resorted to some constructions by erecting a compound wall.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners inter alia submits that under said circumstances, petitioners filed O.S.No.14 of 2026 on the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada.
6. Despite pendency of the said suit, he submits that respondent No.9 is taking steps to process the layout application filed by respondent No.14 and that if layout is approved during the pendency of the said suit, it will lead to multiplicity of proceedings and effectively frustrate the decree that eventually may be passed in favour of the petitioners.
7. However, learned counsel for respondent No.9 placed a copy of instructions dated 15.06.2026 received from the Zonal Joint Director, APCRDA for perusal of the Court. She submits that respondent authorities after due verification, granted Final Layout Plan Permission on 01.04.2026 in favour of respondent No.14.
8. In view of above stated position, learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners will take appropriate steps to challenge the permission granted to respondent No.14, in accordance with the Law.
9. Under the aforementioned circumstances and submissions made, without expressing anything on merits, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, all pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Dt. 22.06.2026 BLV
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Writ Petition No: 14429 of 2026 Date: 22.06.2026 BLV