ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“..declaring the in action of the 3rd Respondent in allowing the 4th Respondent to construct an RCC building in an extent of about Ac.0.04 Cents of property in R.S.No.156/3 of Sivakoti (v) Razole Mandal, Dr.B.R,Ambedkar Konaseema District, A.P. in contravention of Sec 121 of The Andhra Pradesh Panchyat Raj Act, 1994 and G.O.Ms.No.67 dt 26.06.2002 of Panchayat raj and Rural Development (Pts IV) Department as illegal, arbitrary, biased unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to remove such illegal constriction and also strictly adhere to Principles of Law & Natural Justice and to pass.

.”

2. Heard Sri Sree Vyas.P, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.Srihari, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the 3rd respondent is allowing the 4th respondent to construct an RCC building without permission in the subject property in contravention of Section 121 of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.02.2002 of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts IV) Department, inspite of issuing legal notice dated 20.03.2023 by the petitioner. As such filed the present writ petition and prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard.

4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel on instructions submitted that, after noticing that the 4th respondent is constructing building without permission, the 3rd respondent has already issued notice directing him to stop the illegal construction and pursuant to the same, the 4th respondent has stopped the construction activity. He further submitted that, there are certain disputes between petitioner and the 4th respondent and in those circumstances, without approaching Competent Civil Court, the petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court which cannot be entertained by this Court. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard.

5. To the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner’s only limited prayer is that the 4th respondent is constructing building without building permission and it is the duty cast upon the Panchayat Secretary to take steps as per G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.02.2002 and prayed to pass appropriate orders in that regard.

6. Perused the record.

7. It is not in dispute that the 4th respondent is proceeding with the building construction without permission. However it was brought to the notice of this Court that, the notice has been issued to the 4th respondent by the 3rd respondent to stop the building construction and thereby the 4th respondent stopped the building construction and the learned Standing Counsel further submitted that the Panchayat Secretary is contemplating to take steps in accordance with law against the illegal construction of the 4th respondent. However this Court is not passing any orders affecting the rights of the 4th respondent, as such this Court feels that no notice is required to be issued to the 4th respondent.

8. Taking into consideration the submissions of both the learned counsel and as the authorities are contemplating to take steps in accordance with law, there is no purpose in keeping this writ petition pending, this court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition, at the admission stage with the following direction.

The respondent Panchayat concerned is directed to take steps against 4th respondent’s construction, if any, in contravention with the building permission, in accordance with law, by issuing proper show cause notice and calling for explanation, providing an opportunity of being heard and to pass a reasoned order and communicate same to the parties concerned within three(03) months from the date of copy of receipt of this order.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Miscellaneous applicatio