The court emphasized the necessity of proper adjudication and the presence of counter affidavits before vacating a status quo order regarding property demolition.

JUDGMENT :

(Surepalli Nanda, J.)

Heard Sri M. Damodhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, Sri Krishna Reddy Putta, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3 and Smt. Ch. Vijaya Laxmi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of unofficial respondent No.4.

PERUSED THE RECORD:-

2. The present writ appeal is filed by the appellant seeking prayer as under:-

“…to allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the order dated 02.05.2025 in W.P.No.9273 of 2025 passed by the Learned Single Judge and continue the earlier status-quo order dated 26.03.2025 in WP No.9273/2005 as it is, and pass…”

3. The appellant in the present Writ Appeal is the petitioner in W.P.No.9273 of 2025 and the said W.P. had been filed seeking prayer as under:-

“…..to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2^nd respondent in issuing the impugned order dated 10/03/2025 in file No. 10/RDMA/A1/2025 and consequential notice of demolition issued by the 3rd respondent Municipality in file No. G1/67/2024 dated 18/03/2025 in ordering to demolish the alleged deviations to the construction of the House No. 148 at Vidyanagar Colony Kothakota Municipality and Mandal Wanaparthy District though the petitioner obtained construction permission in the year 2019 and complete the construction 2020 in his own property without encroaching any bodies property and further though the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents have not recorded any finding as to whether the said alleged deviations are being caused any inconvenience to the public as illegal unlawful contrary to law and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent municipality to withdraw all cases as against the construction of house No. 148 which the petitioner admittedly constructed by obtaining the Construction permission and pass…”

4. The orders impugned in the present Writ Appeal, dated 02.05.2025 passed in W.P.No.9273 of 2025 is extracted hereunder:

“Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the Speaking Order dated 10.03.2025.

As seen from the contents of the said order, it is evident that several speaking orders have been passed in pursuance of order passed in WP.No.36611 of 2024 and WP.No.486 of 2025. After giving detailed hearing, conclusion has been recorded in paras 5 and 6 of the order by the respondent No.2 holding that the petitioner herein has not denied about the deviations made to the building construction and even after giving enough opportunities, he failed to provide any valid proof. The panchanama conducted on 20.12.2024 by the District Task Force also established deviations in the structures. It was also held that speaking orders were passed in accordance with law.

In view of the above, status quo order dated 26.03.2025 is vacated.

List on 25.06.2025.”

5. The orders passed initially in favour of the appellant/ writ petitioner, dated 26.03.2025 in W.P.No.9273 of 2025 are extracted hereunder:-

Notice to respondent No.4.

Personal notice to respondent No.4 permitted.

Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents No.3 - municipality, seeks time to get instructions.

Status quo, obtaining as on today, shall be maintained in respect of the property, bearing House No.14-8. Vidyanagar Colony, Kothakota Municipality and Mandal" Wanaparthy District, until further orders.

List on 16.04.2025.

6. The order dated 02.05.2025 passed in W.P.No.13536 of 2025 filed by the 4th respondent is extracted herein:-

“In view of the order passed by this Court in WP. No. 9273 of 2025 dated 02.05.2025, there shall be interim direction to the respondent No.4 to implement the speaking order dated 10.03.2025, as expeditiously as possible and file compliance report before this Court by the next date of hearing.

List on 25.06.2025.”

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:-

DISCUSSION:-

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf