Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/33394/2023 of UTLAGARI CHINNAMMA Vs THE STATE OF AP on 29 December 2023
COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.33394 OF 2023 Dt.29.12.2023 Between:- Utlagari Chinnamma, W/o.U.Venkata Ramudu … Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, and
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.
Conclusion
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION No.33394 OF 2023
Dt.29.12.2023
Between:-
Utlagari Chinnamma, W/o.U.Venkata Ramudu … Petitioner
and
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, and others … Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Mr.Challa Siva Sankar Counsel for respondents : The G.P. for Panchayat Raj The G.P. for Revenue
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned counsel for the 4[th] respondent.
2. The writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the subject matter property of an extent of 48 X 31 Sq.feet in Survey No.433/13 situated at Kalva Village as illegal, arbitrary, etc.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is possessor and enjoyer of the subject matter property, wherein she made construction of a small house.
He submits that as the same is not sufficient, the petitioner wanted to make further construction and procured the material for the purpose of the same. While that being the position, learned counsel submits that the 4[th] respondent is interfering with the construction activity and threatening to dispossess the petitioner on the premise that the Gram Panchayat is intending to make construction of Podupu Lakshmi Building in the subject matter land. Drawing the attention of this Court to the material on record including the house tax demands and receipts, learned counsel submits that if the petitioner is dispossessed from the subject matter property and not allowed to make construction, she would suffer irreparable prejudice and great hardship. Making the said submissions, learned counsel seeks appropriate directions.
4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel representing the 4[th]respondent/Gram Panchayat, on instructions, submits that as the petitioner is making some construction without any permission from the Gram Panchayat, the petitioner was informed that in the absence of any permission from the Gram Panchayat, construction cannot be taken up. He also submits that if the petitioner makes application for building permission, the same would be examined by the 4[th] respondent and necessary action would be taken as expeditiously as possible.
5. Considering the said submissions, this Court, instead of keeping the writ petition, deems it to dispose of the same, leaving it open to the petitioner to make appropriate application to the 4[th] respondent as per the procedure in vogue and within a period of four (4) week from the date of receipt of the said application, the 4[th] respondent shall take necessary action. Till then, status quo with regard to the subject matter property shall be maintained in all respects.
6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
December 29, 2023.
Note:Dispatch order copy in one week. (By Order) vasu ________________________
NINALA JAYASURYA, J