SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17798

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Nanepalli Chiranjeevi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 35489/2025



##PAGE1##

2025:APHC:61841

APHC010692412025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 35489/2025

Between:

1. NANEPALLI CHIRANJEEVI,, S/O. N. APPLANAIDU, AGED ABOUT 51

YEARS, R/O. D.NO.57, KAPU STREET, KONDAKERLA,

ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 531033.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT

BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH - 522238.

2. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT,

ANDHRA PRADESH -531033.

3. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,

ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH -531033.

4. THE KONDAKERLA GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT

SECRETARY, ATCHUTHAPURAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI

DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 531033.

...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 to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature

##PAGE2##

2

2025:APHC:61841

of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 4th respondent in not receiving

application made for building permission and in issuing eviction notice

through Proceedings Rc.No. 2 of 2025 dated 22.11.2025, directing me to stop

the work and removal of minor construction in the D.No.16-6, in an extent of

65 Sq.yards in Sy.No.96/A of Kondakeria. Atchuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli

District, even though the construction is made on private land and not

creating any hindrance to the public or vehicles and only due to political

reasons, for being illegal, arbitrary, motivated by political rivalry, violative of

provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, devoid of

principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently direct the

4th respondent to not interfere with my house property in D.No.16-6, in an

extent of 65 Sq.yards in Sy.No.96/A of Kondakeria. Atchuthapuram Mandal,

Anakapalli District, by setting aside the 4th respondent notice dated

22.11.2025, and pass such

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 to

direct the 4th respondent to receive and consider my application for building

permission, by suspending eviction notice proceedings RC No. 2/2025, dated

22.11.2025,Pending disposal of the above writ petition, and pass such

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. VINOD KUMAR PEMMASANI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

##PAGE3##

3

2025:APHC:61841

The Court made the following order:

The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 is not receiving

the application made for building permission and has issued eviction notice

through proceedings vide Rc.No.2 of 2025 dated 22.11.2025 directing the

petitioner to stop the construction work and remove the minor construction in

D.No.16-6 in an extent of 65 sq yards in survey No.96/A of Kondakerla,

Achuthapuram Mandal, Anakapalli District.

2. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Pemmasani, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Smt D.Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj

Department and Sri Y.Koteswararao, learned standing counsel for Gram

Panchayat.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been

stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner is the lawful owner and

possessor of the subject Gramakantam land, which was purchased by his

mother in the year 1986 under a registered sale deed. Since then, the

petitioner and his family have been in continuous possession and enjoyment

of the subject premises by constructing a residential house. Due to the

dilapidated condition of the old house, the petitioner decided to construct a

new house in the same premises without any diversions or deviation, after

obtaining a build

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top