Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 3117
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V. SUJATHA, J
Ganipineni Rajasekhar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 4033/2025
SHAIK MEERAVALI, GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
Municipal authorities have a duty to act on complaints regarding illegal constructions, ensuring compliance with relevant laws.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Petition filed challenging inaction of municipal authorities regarding illegal construction encroaching upon road margin - Court directed authorities to proceed with enquiry and take appropriate action against illegal construction. (Paras 1, 5)
(B) Administrative Law - Duty of authorities - Municipal authorities are obligated to act upon complaints regarding illegal constructions and ensure compliance with relevant laws. (Paras 2, 5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a resident of Kandukur Town, challenged the inaction of municipal authorities regarding unauthorized construction by a third party encroaching upon road margin, despite prior complaints and endorsements indicating illegal activity.
Findings of Court:
The court found that action had been initiated by the municipal authorities in response to the petitioner's complaint and directed them to continue with the enquiry and take appropriate action.
Issues: The main issue was whether the municipal authorities acted appropriately in response to complaints regarding illegal construction.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the duty of municipal authorities to act on complaints of illegal construction and ensure compliance with the law, thereby reinforcing the principle of accountability in administrative actions.
Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
“….to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not restraining the illegal/unauthorised construction of building situated at Door No.15-3-11 in S.No.865/1A1A2A1 of 23rd ward, Varaparlavaripalem, Kandukur Town, SPSR Nellore District by encroaching the road side of 19.54 Sq.yards in spite of the endorsement vide Roc.No.1385/2024/G1 dated 24.01.2025 is illegal, improper, arbitrary and unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and consequently to direct the 2nd Respondent to restrain the illegal/unauthorised construction of building situated at Door No.15-3-11 in S.No.865/1A1A2A1 of 23rd ward, Varaparlavaripalem, Kandukur Town, SPSR Nellore District by encroaching the road side of 19.54 Sq.yards by Respondent No.3 forthwith….”
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
a) The petitioner is a resident of Sivalayam Street, Kandukur Town, SPSR Nellore District. The petitioner purchased one RCC house situated at D.No.15-3-15/1 in Sy.No.865/1A1A2A1 to an extent of 227.3/9 Sq.yards in a bank auction and got registered the same vide sale deed dated 15.02.2023. The petitioner constructed a pucca RCC building with Ground+first floor and has been residing therein without any interference from anyone.
b) When unofficial respondent No.3 is constructing an illegal/unauthorized building situated at Door No.15-3-11 in S.No.865/1A1A2A1 of 23rd ward, Varaparlavaripalem, Kandukur Town, SPSR Nellore District, by encroaching upon the road side of an extent of 19.54 sq.yards, the petitioner informed respondent No.2 about the same. However, no action has been initiated against the illegal construction made by respondent No.3.
c) The petitioner filed an application under RTI Act on 18.11.2024 seeking information regarding properties registered in favour of the Municipality through settlement deeds, and whether construction can be carried out on such land. In response, respondent No.2 issued Endorsement vide R.T.I.No.1512/2024/G1, dated 10.12.2024, stating that they would take action against the persons who made illegal constructions.
d) The petitioner also made a complaint/representation on 06.01.2025 to respondent No.2 regarding the illegal construction activities of respondent No.3. Upon receiving the said complaint, the 2nd respondent conducted an enquiry and issued an endorsement vide Roc.No.1385/2024/G1, dated 24.01.2025, stating that the 3rd respondent was constructing a building by encroaching upon the road margin of an extent of 19.54 sq.yards. However, the 2nd respondent failed to restrain the illegal construction, which is in violation of the A.P. Municipality Act. Challenging the inaction of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner filed this writ petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and Mrs.V.Sireesha Rani, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2.
4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 informed this Court that, in pursuance of the complaint made by the petitioner on 06.01.2025, a provisional notice was issued to respondent No.3 on 24.01.2025, calling for an explanation. The same was also communicated to the petitioner vide endorsement dated 24.01.2025.
5. In view of the above facts and circumstances, since action has been initiated by respondent No.2 in response to the complaint made by the petitioner herein, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to proceed further in pursuance of the provisional notice issued to re
