Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/15370/2026 of SIDDAMURTHY NARAYANA REDDY Vs THE STATE OF AP on 14 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 15370/2026 Between: 1. SIDDAMURTHY NARAYANA REDDY, S/O S. JANKIRAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O D.NO 2 KASINAYANA TOWN AND
APHC010291702026
IN TH
MONDA
TWO
THE HONOURA
WR
Between:
1. SIDDAMURTHY NA
AGED ABOUT 71
KASINAYANA TOW
2. PULLURU KHAJA
YEARS, R/O D.NO
YSR KADAPA DIST
1. THE STATE OF AP
AND BUILDING DE
AMARAVATI, GUNT
2. THE DISTRICT CO
3. THE
EXECUTIV
DEPARTMENT, YS
4. THE DEPUTY EX
DEPARTMENT, YS
5. THE ASSISTANT E
DEPARTMENT, YS
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
AY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE
O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL
RIT PETITION NO: 15370/2026
ARAYANA REDDY, S/O S. JANKIR
1 YEARS, R/O D.NO 2-45, SR
WN AND MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DIS
VALLI, , S/O KHASIM SAHEB, AG
O. 13/142, PORUMAMILLA TOWN A
TRICT
...P
AND
P, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRET
EPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT,
TUR DISTRICT-522238
LLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT-
E
ENGINEER,
ROADS
AND
SR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA-
XECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS AN
SR KADAPA DISTRICT AT BADVEL-5
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS A
SR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA-
...RES
RC,J
DESH
LAPATI
RAMI REDDY,
EE AVADUTA
STRICT
ED ABOUT 70
AND MANDAL,
PETITIONER(S)
TARY, ROADS
VELAGAPUDI,
-516001
D
BUILDING
516001
ND BUILDING
516227.
AND BUILDING
516001
SPONDENT(S):
RC,J
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 an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, preferably one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No. 3 to 5 in taking steps to demolish the shops of the Petitioners bearing D.No. 12/488, D.No. 12/489 and 12/490 in Porumammila town and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District for the purpose of Road Widening without issuance of notice and payment of compensation as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, unsustainable, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, contrary to Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
and consequently direct the Respondents not dispossess the Petitioners from the shops without following due process of law and 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 Pleased to direct the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioner including demolition of the shops bearing D.No. 12/488, D.No. 12/489 and 12/490 in Porumammila town and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.SODUM ANVESHA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS
2.GP FOR REVENUE
RC,J
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
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in trying to demolish the shops of the petitioners bearing D.Nos.12/488, 12/489 & 12/490 in Porumamilla town and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District for the purpose of road widening without issuing any notice and without paying any compensation.
2. Heard Ms.Sahithi Aparna, learned counsel, representing Ms.Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for petitioners, and Sri Venkata Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
3. Ms.Sahithi Aparna, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities are trying to demolish the shops of the petitioners for the purpose of road widening without issuing any notice, without acquiring the land and without paying any compensation. She would further contend that if the authorities are permitted to succeed in their unlawful acts livelihood of the petitioners as well as their families would get affected. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition directing the authorities not to interfere with the subject shops of the petitioners.
3. Sri Praveen, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads & Buildings, by placing on record the written instructions dated 11.06.2026 of the Executive Engineer, R&B Division, Kadapa, submitted that the authorities RC,J
have not taken any steps for demolition of the subject shops of the petitioners.
4. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of by recording the contents of the written instructions.
5. In view of the above, since the authorities submitted that they have not taken any steps for demolition of the subject shops, this writ petition can be disposed of.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the subject shops, except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 15th June, 2026.
RR