2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 14239
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J
TEEGLA SRIDHAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 16546/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: [Not mentioned]
For the Respondents: [Not mentioned]
Illegal construction on government land without approval violates statutory duties under municipal laws.
Headnote:This petition seeks a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution, declaring the failure to act against unauthorized construction on government land as illegal and arbitrary. The court found that the 6th respondent's construction infringed upon public land without approval. The court framed issues of illegality and jurisdiction, concluding that the encroachment must be removed by municipal authorities as per statutory provisions, within a defined timeframe.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petition details illegal construction encroaching on public land. (Para 1 , 1 , 3) |
| 2. the court hears arguments by both parties on the unauthorized construction. (Para 2) |
| 3. court observes the necessity of removal under statutory provisions. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court disposes of the writ petition, instructing compliance with its directions. (Para 6) |
1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“to issue a Writ, One in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not taking action to remove the illegal/unauthorized construction of 6th respondent by encroaching government land i.e. 20 feet's of Road and increased road Might 3 feet's situated at Infront of the 6th respondent house Devarapalli Village and Mandal, East Godavari District, though petitioner made representation dated 29.04.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 21 of Constitution of India and also violative of AP Panchayat Raj Act and consequently direct the respondents No.4 to remove unauthorized construction of 6th respondent by encroaching government land i.e Road forthwith and pass
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat appearing for the 5th respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the unofficial respondent, i.e., the 6th respondent herein, is carrying out illegal construction of a shed and dumping gravel by raising the road level by 3 feet. Furthermore, he has constructed a staircase on the road, due to which waste water is not flowing down and is stagnating in front of the petitioner’s house. These activities are being carried out by encroaching upon the road margin situated in Devarapalli Village and Mandal, East Godavari District, without any prior permission or approval from the competent authority. In this regard, the petitioner made a representation to the 3rd respondent on 31.05.2025 through online mode, and again on 29.04.2025 to the 5th respondent, requesting for removal of the unauthorized construction on the road margin and the elevated road level raised by the 6th respondent. Even after receipt of the representations of the petitioner, the respondent authorities neither considered nor removed the encroachments nor issued any proceedings so far.
Hence, the present writ petition.
4. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel furnished written instructions dated 30.07.2025, issued by the 5th respondent, wherein it is stated that, in view of the directions of this Court dated 08.07.2025, the 5th respondent, i.e., the Grama Panchayat, inspected and verified the alleged illegal construction by the 6th respondent. Upon having physical verification, it appears that the 6th respondent has encroached upon the road margin and carried out illegal construction. It is further stated that the said encroachment can be removed after conducting a proper survey and demarcation with the assistance of the Roads and Buildings Department as well as the Mandal Surveyor. It is also stated that, with the cooperation of the said two departments and after completion of demarcation, the 5th respondent Grama Panchayat will proceed with the removal of the encroachments, as alleged by the petitioner, in accordance with the provisions of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat appearing for the 5th respondent, and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is observed that admittedly there is no approval or prior permission in favour of the 6th respondent to carry out any construct