HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HARINATH.N
Ponnuru Dhanalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 36452/2025
##PAGE1##
2025:APHC:61553
APHC010711452025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 36452/2025
Between:
1. P ONNURU DHANALAKSHMI,, W/O HAZARATHAIAH (LATE) AGED
ABOUT 59 YEARS, SOLE PROPRIETOR OF SRI SAILAJA
PLYWOOD CENTER, SHOP. NO. 12, A.C. BOMMA MUNICIPAL
SHOPPING COMPLEX, SUBEDHARPET, NELLORE. R/ O 10/468,
SUNDARAGIRIVARI STREET, SANTHAPET, NELLORE.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPALITIES AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI
522238, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. T HE NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS
COMMISSIONER, CORPORATION OFFICE, DARGAMITTA,
NELLORE 524003.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be
pleased topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in
the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the declaring the action of 2nd
respondent in taking steps and making attempts to dispossess the petitioner
from rented shop i.e Shop No. 12, A.C. Bomma Municipal Shopping
Complex, Subedharpet, Chinna Bazar, Nellore, pursuant to notice vide ROC
No. 033/2025/Al dated -09-2025 issued on 17-10-2025 by the 2nd
##PAGE2##2
2025:APHC:61553
respondent concluding that the 25 years of lease period for the same was
concluded, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner, without providing
necessary documents about conclusion of lease as the same are illegal,
arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the notice issued by
the 2nd respondent vide ROC No. 033/2025/A1 dated -09-2025 issued on 17-
10-2025, while directing the 2nd respondent not to interfere with the
possession of Petitioner over the said property and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice of the 2nd
respondent vide ROC No. 033/2025/A1 dated -09-2025 issued on 17-10-
2025, including dispossession, eviction of the petitioner from rented shop i.e
Shop No.12, A.C. Bomma Municipal Shopping Complex, Subedharpet,
Chinna Bazar, Nellore, by the 2nd respondent and their staff and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
The Court made the following:
##PAGE3##3
2025:APHC:61553
ORDER:
The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing
notice calling upon the petitioner to handover the vacant possession of shop
for facilitating the 2nd respondent to conduct a fresh auction and for allotment
of shops. The petitioner was also called upon to pay the entire outstanding
arrears of rent, if any, and to pay the electricity bills, and to hand over the keys
of the shops, along with proof of payment of the electricity bills, within 30 days
from the date of the impugned notice.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s name
was mutated in the records of the 2nd respondent as a lessee and that the 25
years period of lease, which is generally granted insofar as Municipal Shop
Complex is yet to expire. It is submitted that the respondent authorities cannot
call upon the petitioner to vacate the shop and handover the vacant physical
possession before the expiry of 25 years lease period.
3. Sri A.S.C. Bose, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd
respondent submits that the 25 years lease period has been completed long
back. It is submitted that the petitioner mutated her name, and the mutation of
the name of the petitioner by the respondent authority cannot be considered
as a fresh lease, which would have to be considered for the fresh term of 25
years from the date of mutation. It is further submitted
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.