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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 15505

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
SANKURI VENKATESWARLU – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WP 2793/2026



APHC010045262026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.2793 of 2026 Between:

1. SANKURI VENKATESWARLU, S/O SEETARAMAYYA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS (TIFFIN CENTRE), RESIDENT OF D.NO.15-1-119, 15TH BLOCK, NEHRU NAGAR, 1ST LINE, MACHERLA TOWN, MACHERLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P.

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GURAZALA DIVISION, GURAZALA, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P.

4. THE COMMISSIONER, MACHERLA MUNICIPALITY, MACHERLA, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P. 522426

5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, GURAZALA DIVISION, GURAZALA, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P. 522601

6. THE TOWN PLANER, MACHERLA MUNICIPALITY, GURAZALA DIVISION, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P.522426 ...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 a Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in attempting to demolish the Petitioner's house property bearing D.No. 15-1-119, 15th Block, Macherla Town, Palnadu District, for the purpose of road widening without issuing any notice and without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondents not to demolish the Petitioner's property.

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. MAMIDI PRAKASH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS

2. GP FOR REVENUE

3. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI SC For MUNICIPALITIES The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in attempting to demolish the petitioner’s house property bearing D.No.15-1-119, 15th Block, Macherla Town, Palnadu District, without issuing notice and without following due procedure of law, for the purpose of road widening, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

2. It is narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition that the petitioner has purchased the land admeasuring an extent of 122 square yards, vide a registered sale deed bearing document No.481/1998 dated 22.04.1998, registered at the office of the Sub- Registrar, Macherla, and since the date of purchase, the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property without any interruption and he constructed a residential house therein after obtaining due permission from Macherla Municipality, i.e., ground floor (plinth area 35.18 sq. mts.) and first floor (plinth area 35.18 sq. mts) with a total plinth area of 70.36 sq. mts. in a site area of 100.85 sq.mts on approval of the 4th respondent, vide proceedings B.A.No.223/2010/G1/ 2010 dated 27.12.2010. The Roads and Buildings Department have recently initiated a road widening project in Macherla Town and the Department has marked several buildings for demolition including the petitioner’s house and the said action of the respondents is highly arbitrary, illegal and highhanded and a gross violation of the principles of natural justice and also the said action is in violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Hence, prayed to direct the respondents not to take any coercive steps without following due process of law.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4, 5 and 6 furnished written instructions addressed by the 4th respondent- Commissioner. The said written instructions indicate that the Na

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