Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/33490/2023 of Sevva Srinivasa Vara Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 29 December 2023
COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION Nos.33487, 33490 and 33491 of 2023 W.P.No.33487 of 2023 Narigineedi Srinivas, S/o Parasuramudu, Hindu, aged about 56 years, #45-12-26; Yerukonda Street, Danavaipeta, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION Nos.33487, 33490 and 33491 of 2023
W.P.No.33487 of 2023
Narigineedi Srinivas, S/o Parasuramudu, Hindu, aged about 56 years, #45-12-26; Yerukonda Street, Danavaipeta, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District.
Versus
… Petitioner
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and two others.
Counsel for the petitioner
: Sri P. Rajesh Babu
Counsel for respondents
Sevva Srinivasa Vara Prasad, S/o late Suryanarayana, aged about 58 years, Occ: Medical Shop Business, R/o D.No.85-51-142, Model Colony, V.L. Puram, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District.
Versus
… Petitioner
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and two others.
… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner
: Sri P. Rajesh Babu
Counsel for respondents
Ukullabharanam Veerababu, S/o baburao, Hindu, aged about 49 years, R/o D.No.45-36-3, Thadithota, Rajamahendravara – 533 103, East Godavari District.
Versus
… Petitioner
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and two others.
… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner Counsel for respondents
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.
:: COMMON ORDER ::
Assailing the speaking orders dated 23.12.2023 issued by respondent No.2 vide ROC No.6231/2022-G2, under Section 456 of the A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) the petitioner filed the respective writ petitions.
2. Heard P. Rajesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G. Naresh Kumar, learned counsel representing Sri M. Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. Notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with since no adverse order is passed against respondent No.3.
4. Learned counsel for the petitoners would submit that the respondent No.2, by the order impugned, directed petitioner/tenant to vacate the dilapidated premises within a period of three days from the date of receipt of the notice. Learned counsel would further contend that structural stability test was not conducted in the presence of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that against the order impugned in the writ petition, an appeal under Section 654 of the Act, would lie before Senior Civil Judge (Sub-Judge).
6. As can be seen from the record, respondent No.3, owner of the building submitted representation dated 13.12.2022 to the Commissioner of respondent No.2 stating that premises bearing D.No.46-15-21, Opposite Gandhi Park Main Gate Road, Danavaipeta, Rajamahendravaram is in dilapidated condition. Respondent No.3 also enclosed copy of the structural stability report, dated 10.11.2022 issued by Civil Engineering Department of JNTU, Kakinada, recommending modifications and demolition of the subject premises. Basing on the representation, the Commissioner of respondent No.2 conducted enquiry by issuing notices to the petitioner as well as the owner of the building and passed the impugned speaking order.
7. As pointed out by learned counsel for respondent No.2, against the order passed under Section 456 of the Act, an appeal under Section 654 of the Act, would lie to the Judge. Section 654 of the Act reads as follows:
“1.
…
…
2. …
3.
4. …
…
5.
6. an order requiring a dangerous structure to be pulled down, secured or removed under Section 456; …” be pulled down, secured or removed under Section 456; …”
8. Thus, a perusal of the extract supra, would indicate that an appeal shall lie to the Judge (Sub-Judge/Senior Civil Judge), against the order of the Commissioner and such appeal has to be filed within one month from the date of the order of the Commissioner.
9. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that structural stability test was not conducted in the presence of the petitioner. In fact, as seen from the order impugned, the reports were considered by the learned Commissioner. However, whether the structural stability test was conducted in the presence of the petitioners or not being a disputed question of fact, normally will not be adjudicated in the writ petition under Art 226 of the Constitution of India. In the appeal, petitioners can as well agitate the same.
10. In view of the same, without going into the merits, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the petitioners to avail the remedy under Section 654 (6) of the Act, within a period of one week from today. Respondent/authorities shall not take any coercive steps regarding the subject building for a period of one week.
If the building collapses within one week, neither the Corporation nor owner of the building is responsible and the petitioners alone are responsible.
This Court did not express any view on the merits of the matter and hence this order will not come in the way of the learned Senior Civil Judge, in deciding the appeals or any interlocutory applications on merits.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________
Note : Furnish Certified copy by 30.12.2023 B/o ikn B/o ikn
51
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION Nos.33487, 33490 and 33491 of 2023
Date : 29.12.2023
ikn