Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/8098/2026 of GHANTA SATYANARAYANA Vs UNION OF INDIA on 5 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO: 8098/2026 Between: 1. GHANTA SATYANARAYANA, S/O SAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDENT OF
APHC010148052026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO: 8098/2026
Between:
1. GHANTA SATYANARAYANA, S/O SAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
2. SMT. SHAIK SHAMSHAD, , W/O SHAIK MASTANVALI, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KANAGALA VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
3. SHAIK MASTANVALI,, S/O ABDUL SAMAD, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KANAGALA VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
4. MEKA USHARANI,, W/O LATE KOTESWARARAO, AGED ABOUT 60
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
5. GHANTA VENKATA SUBBAMMA,, W/O LATE SAMBASIVARAO, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
RESIDENT
OF
GUDAVALLI
VILLAGE,
CHERUKUPALLI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
6. BANDARU SRAVANTHI, , W/O SUDHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
7. GADDIPATI BASAVA SANKAR,, S/O RAMAKOTESWARARAO, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
RESIDENT
OF
GUDAVALLI
VILLAGE,
CHERUKUPALLI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
8. GADDIPATI SOMASEKHAR, , S/O NARENDRA BABU, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
9. GOGINENI RAMA MOHANRAO, , S/O SAMBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
10. RAVI VENKATESWARA RAO,, S/O SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 100
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
11. KOTA NAGAKOTI VENKATA RAMANA,, S/O BASAVA PUNNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE,
CHERUKUPALLI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
12. ALAPATI PAVAN KUMAR,, S/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 50
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
13. MEKA MURAHARI RAO,, S/O VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT.
14. GOGINENI VANISRI,, W/O CHANDRASEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 61
YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUDAVALLI VILLAGE, CHERUKUPALLI
MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF
ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI-110001
2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR2 AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, LA NH-216, BAPATLA DISTRICT-522101
...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, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 1 and 2 in making attempts to dispossess/demolish the houses of the petitioners pursuant the Gazette of India Extraordinary notification bearing No.CG-DL-E- 18022026-270 247, under Section 3A(1) of National High Ways Act,1957 dated 17-02-2026 without considering the objections dated 07-03-2026 etc., submitted to the 2nd respondent/Competent Authority as arbitrary, illegal unconstitutional, opposed to the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the National Highways Act and consequently direct the
respondents 1 and 2 not to dispossess the petitioners from their houses/sites or demolish their houses without considering their objections under Section 3C
of the National Highways Act 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 dispossess the petitioners from their houses/sites or demolish their houses without considering their objections under Section 3C of the National Highways Act and pass IA NO: 2 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 May be pleased to receive the documents filed along with this petition as additional material papers in W.P. No. 8098 of 2026 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. N SRIRAM MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.8098 of 2026
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:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent No.2 is making attempts to dispossess/demolish the houses of the petitioners pursuant to the Gazette of India Extraordinary notification bearing No.CG-DL-E- 18022026-270247, dated 17.02.2026 under Section 3A(1) of National Highways Act, 1956, without considering the objections submitted by them on 07.03.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that such action of the respondent No.2 amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and requested to protect the interest of the petitioners.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue Department appearing for the 2nd respondent, on instructions would submit that the respondent No.2 is the Competent Authority under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and he is empowered to take necessary action in accordance with law. He would submit that pursuant to the notification issued by the 2nd respondent, all objections submitted by the interested persons are required to be considered by the Competent Authority. He further submits that the Competent Authority shall conduct the proceedings strictly in adherence to the principles of natural justice and after due consideration of all objections and upon conducting the necessary enquiry, will pass a reasoned and speaking order under Section 3C(2) of the National Highways Act. He would further submit that no coercive action, such as dispossession or demolition will be undertaken by the respondent No.2 without following due process of law and contemplation of the statutory procedure.
5. On perusal of the written instructions placed before this Court by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, in our considered view, it is appropriate and reasonable to dispose of this writ petition at the admission stage with the consent of the learned counsel on both sides instead of keeping it pending for years together to meet the interest of justice.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. The written instructions of the 2nd respondent, dated 24.03.2026 are placed on record wherein, it is stated that the objections of the petitioners will be considered in accordance with law and a reasoned and speaking order will be passed under Section 3C(2) of the National Highways Act and they will not take any coercive steps for dispossession or demolition without following due process of law.
7. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
Date: 06.04.2026 SA
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.8098 of 2026
Dt.06.04.2026 SA