Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Gadde Muniswara Rao vs The State Of A.P., on 6 February, 2025
]N THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY,
TWO THOUSANb AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT:
HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
wp. Nos.15026,16982,17008,17009] 17011,17023,19744119745,19746,
19751,19752,19753,19755] 19756] 19767,19798,19801,19873,19878,
19881119950,19959] 19960 of 2024
WRIT PETITION NO: 15026 OF 2024
Between :
M/s. Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, A registered Partnership firm under
the provisions of Indian partnership Act,1932, Having its Office at Door.No.6
2020/1, FIat.No.502, 4th Floor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
visakhapatnam 530017, Rep. by the Power of Attorney/ Agent
G.Venkateswara Rao, Aged 44 years, S/o. G. Janardhana Rao,
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl.Secy, Department of MA &
UD, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its Commissioner.
3. Vishakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development, Authority
Visakhapatnam, Rep by Metropolitan Commissioner
4. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its PrI.Secy, Department of
Revenue, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District
5. The District Collector of Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam.
6. The Revenue Divisional Officer,Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam
7. The Tahsildar,Visakhapatnam Rural, Visakhapatnam
8. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, S/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years,
Occ:Business, R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old Dairy Farm,
Adarsh Nagar, Visakhapatnam
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of more particularly the action of Respondent No.2
herein in issuing proceedings vide B.A.NO.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (e
office299800) dated 06.07.2024 (Served upon the Petitioner on ll.07.2024)
by which the Building permission granted to the petitioner is kept in abeyance
and further directing the Petitioner to stop the work and not to proceed with
any further constructI'On activity aS being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without
jurisdiction, violative of Princl'ples of Natural Justice, violative of the provisions
of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal CorporatI'On Act, 1955, Contrary to the
Order Dt. 14.03.2022 of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.6394 of 2022, anc!
violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and
Consequently, set aside the proceedings vide B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZIA
DA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 (Served upon the Petitioner on
ll.07.2024) issued by the Respondent No.2;
lANO: 1 OF2024:
_ __ _
Petition under Section 151 of CPC is filed praying that inthe
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the
High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice 299800) dated 06.07.2024
(Served upon the Petitioner on ll.07.2024) issued by Respondent No.2,
pending disposal of WP.No.15026 of 2024, on the file of the High Court.
lA NO: 2 OF 2024:
Petition under Section 151 of CPC is filed praying that inthe
circumstances stated in the affildavit filed in support of the writ petition, the
High Court may be pleased to Direct the Respondents not to interfere with
construction activity being undertaken by the Petitioner in schedule property
admeasuring an extent of Ac.12.51 cents in Sy.No.92/3 of Endada Village,
VIsakhapatnam Rural Mandal, VIsakhapatnam District, pending disposal of
WP.No.15026 of 2024, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court order dated
26.07.2024, 01.08.2024108.08.2024, 22.08.20241 12.09.2024121.10.2024]
14.ll.2024, 28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01:2025 & 24.01.2025
made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ajay Kumar Kanaparthi,
Advocate for the Petitioner and GP for Municipal Administration & Urban
Developmentfor the Respondent No.1 and Sri K.Madhava Reddy, Standing
Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and Sri V.SuryaKiran, Standing Counsel for
the Respondent No.3 and GP for Revenue for the Respondent Nos.4 to 7;
WRIT PETITION NO: 16982 OF 2024
Betwee n :
Jawadi Gopala Krishna Murfhy, S/o Late Sri J Krishna Rao, Aged about 66
years R/o Plot No.18, Justice Colony, Road No.10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad
500034.
PetItiOner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its Prl.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater VIsakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, VIshakhapatnam,
Rep by its Commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No,502, 4th Floor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the cl'rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly
l'n the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more Particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Buildl'ng permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further dI'reCting the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further constructI'On activity solely because of the civil disputes
Pending between the Respondent Nos.3& 4 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust,
violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of the provisions of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and vIOlatiVe Of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the
Proceedings Vide .B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated
06.07.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2.
JA+MO: 1 OF _2qu:
Petition under sectIOn 151 of CPC is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 l'ssued
by Respondent No.2, Pendlng disposal of wp 16982 of 2024, on the file of the
Hl'gh Court.
The petIlion coming on for hearl'ng, upon perusing the petition and the
affldavlt filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments ofSRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURl, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!d£B!lPETITION NO: 17008 OF 2LQ24
Between :
Mullapudi Anasuya, w/o MuIIapudi Venkata Rao, Aged about 78 years R/o H
No 220, 1St ward, Near Clnema Hall Center, Jangareddygudem Mandal,
Lakkavaram, west Godavari534451`.
i ."
Petitloner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravatl', Guntur District.
2. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municl'paI CorporatIOn, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4th Floor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o:RJama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petition under Artl'cle 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated In the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more partICularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein ln l'SSulng proceedings
vl'de B.A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6 07.2024
keepl'ng the Building permissI'On granted to the Respondent No.3 jn abeyance
_ ___. .` . ,v.v .I . C]l,t=yc]l lug
and
anr' flfurther directing
lr+hJlr A]..A_I.:_ __ Jl]the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wlth any further constructl'on actjvlty solely because of the clv" dlsputes
pending between the Respondent Nos.3& 4 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust,
vl'olative of prI|nCIPIes of Natural JustI'Ce, vl'olative of the provlsions of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and violative of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the constitution of lndIa and Consequently set asl'de the
I
proceedings vIde B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated
o6.07.2024 l'ssued by the Respondent No.2.
petit,Con under section 151 of cpc is filed praying that jn the
circumstances stated in the affldavl't filed in suppon of the petllion, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/Z1"DA/2021 (eoffl'ce299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, PendIng dl'sposal of WP 17008 of 2024, on the file of the
Hlgh Court.
The petl'tion coml'ng on for hearing, upon perusI'ng the Petition and the
affldavlI filed l'n support thereof and the order of the Hl'gh court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made hereIn
and upon hearing the arguments of sri Kalepu yashwanth, Advocate for the
petitl'oner and of GP for MuncI'Pal Admn and urban Dev AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of srj J.Dl'leep Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent
No.2 and of sri srjnl'vas Rao Boddulurj, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.3 &
4.
Between.I
KuchI'Pudi Satyanarayana, s/o Ramarao, Aged about 62 years R/o D No 257,
Tanuku Mandalam, Maddapuram, west Godavarl'534146.
4:i
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its Prl.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Distrl'ct.
2. The Greater VIsakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, VIshakhapatnam,
Rep by its Commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4thFIoor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
VIsakhapatham530017. Rep: by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, S/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Oco.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, Old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, VIsakhapatnam.
Respondents
Petition under Artl'cle 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewlth, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/BZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the civil disputes
Pending between the Respondent Nos.3& 4 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust,
violative of Principles of Natural Justice, violative of the provisions of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act,1955 and violative of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the
Proceedings Vide B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated
06.07.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2.
lANO:1 OF2024:
_ _ _
L+t +I
Petition under Section 151 of CPC is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedjngls vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 ISSued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of WP 17009 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearI'ng, upon perusI'ng the PetjtIOn and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate for
the petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURI, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!a±B!I±EI!I!Q±!±!QiJ 7011 O E2Q2±
Between : I i '`r
Lavudya Rambai, w/o sri Ramulu, Aged about 67 years R/o H No 7156,
Pandurangapuram, Khammam507001.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater visakhapatnam MunicI'Pal Corporation, vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its comml'ssioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4th Floor, Su`k§hetra East PoInt, East Point Colony,
visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its ManagIng Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultrl'es, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or dlrection more particularly
l'n the nature of 'writ of Mandamris'`'declaring the action of the Respondents
more Particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wl'th any further construction activlty solely because of the cl'vil disputes
Pending between the Respondent Nos.3& 4 as being l'IIegal, arbitrary, unjust,
violative of Princl'ples of Natural Justice, violatI'Ve Of the Provisions Of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act,1955 and vlolative of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the Constitutionl of India and consequently set aside the
proceedl'ngs vl'de B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated
06.07.2024 l'ssued by the Respondent No.2.
lANO: 1 OF2024:
Petition under section 151 of CPC is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hl'gh
Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/396O/B/ZWDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of WP 17011 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
i,'`
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the Hl'gh Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRIN!VAS RAO BODDULURI, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!a±B±I±EI!I!Q±!J!!Q±ZQ23±
Between:
Ainampudi Nageswara Rao, S/o Ayyanna, Aged about 68 years,
R/o.H.No.71409, KoyavarI'Palem, Enamadala, Guntur522019.
...PetItiOner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Distrlct.
2. The Greater visakhapatnam MunI'CiPal Corporation, vI|Shakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissloner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East Point, East Point colony,
vl'sakhapatnam530017. Rep by its ManagI'ng Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, vI'Sakhapatnam.
...Respondents
petition under Article 226 of'the constI'tutiOn Of India l's filed praying that
in the cI'rCumStanCeS Stated in the affldavl't filed therewith, the Hlgh Court may
be pleased to issue an appropr,ate writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of IWrlI of Mandamus' declaring the actlon of the Respondents
more partlcularly the action of Respondent No.2 hereI'n In ISSuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Buildl'ng permission granted to the Respondent No.3 I'n abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction actI'Vl'ty solely because of the clv" disputes
pending between the Respondent Nos.3& 4 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust,
vI'OlatiVe Of PrI'nCiPleS Of Natural idstice, violatIVe Of the provisions of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act,1955 and violative of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the
Proceedings vide B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated
06.07.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2.
lANO: 1 OF 2024:
Petllion under section 151 of CPC is filed praying that l'n the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending dI'SPOSal Of WP 17023 of 2024, on the file of the
HIgh Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12,2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURl, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!!£B!|PETITION NO: 19744 OF 2qu
Between :
Vallabhaneni satyanarayana, s/o subba Rao, Aged about 69 years, R/o Door
No 4133, Korumaml'di, Nidadavolu, West Godavari534305.
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Velagapudl, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater visakhapatnam Municipal CorporatIOn, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commISSiOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East pol'nt, East point colony,
visakhapatnam530017.Rep by l'ts Managlng partner.
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
BusI'neSS. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petltion under ArtICle 226 of the constitutl'on of lndI'a iS fl'Ied prayIng that
in the cI'rCumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate wrlI or order or direction more particularly
Ion the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein l'n issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Building permission grahted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the cI'V" disputes
pendl'ng between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as beI'ng illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, vl'olative of pr,'nciples of Natural JustI'Ce, ViOIative of the
provisIOnS Of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and
vI|OIatjve of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constitutI'On of India and
consequently set aside the proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
2024..
petl'tjon under section 151 of cpc is fl'Ied prayI'ng that In the
cl'rcumstances stated l'n the affidavit filed l'n support of the petl'tI'On, the Hl'gh
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedlngs vide
B.A. No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending dl'sposal of wp 19744 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the earlier order of the High Court
dt.28.ll.2024, 12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made
herein and upon hearing the arguments ofsRI KALEPU YASHWANTH,
Advocate for the petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV
AP for the Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standing Counsel
for the Respondent No.2.
ELRIT PETITION NO: 19745 OFJ2g2±
Between :
Pl'lla Narasingarao, s/o pilla Bangarayya, Aged about 63 years R/o Door No
520, PM Palem, Chandrampalem, pothinamaIIayapalem, Visakhapatnam
530041.
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Distrlct.
2. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFIoor, Sukshetra East Point, East Pol'nt Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
BusI'neSS. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old DaIry Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
PetltI'On under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavl't filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or directl'on more particularly
in the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more Particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice29980O) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the civil disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as belng IIIegaI,
arbltrary, unjust, violatIVe Of Principles of Natural Justice, vIOIative of the
Provisions Of the Greater Hyderabad Munl'cipaI Corporation Act, 1955 and
violative of Articles 14, 21 and1 5ooA of the Constitution of India and
Consequently set aside the proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 ISSued
by the Respondent No.2.
JALNO: 1 OF 2024:
Petitl'on under sectl'on 151 of CPC is filed praying that in the
cl'rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petI'tiOn, the Hl'gh
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A. No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAI2021 (e`office299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of wp 19745 of 2024, on the file of the
`JJ
High Court.
The petI'tiOn coming On for hearI'ng, upon Perusing the Petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12,12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. Kalepu Yashwanth, Advocate for the
Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURl, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!A!B!T PETITION NO: 19746 OF 202Z4
Betwee n :
Abbina Hanumantha Rao, S/o Abbina Subba Rao, Aged about 64 years R/o
Door No.2146, Near Water Tank, Sangayagudem, Devarapalli Mandal West
Godavari534313.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its Commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4th FIoor, Sukshetra East Pol'nt, East Point Colony,
Vl'sakhapatnam530017.Rep by its Managing Partner.
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, Old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the ConstitutI'On Of lndI'a iS filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly
l'n the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more Particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein I'n ISSuIng Proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Building permissl'on granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further constructIOn activity SOlely because Of the Civil disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justice, violative of the
Provisions Of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and
violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and
consequently set asI'de the proceedings vlde
.
B.A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
petl'tion under section 151 of cpc is filed prayIng that ,'n the
cI'rCumstances stated jn the affldavI't filed in support of the petjtIOn, the Hl'gh
court may be pleased to suspend the operatIOn of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/Z1"DAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of wp 19746 of 2024, on the file of the
HIgh Court.
The petl't,Ion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petl't,on and the
affldav,'t filed in support thereof and the order of the Hlgh court dated
2811.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made here,'n
and upon hear,'ng the arguments of sri Kalepu yashwanth, Advocate,
Advocate for the petjtl'oner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV
AP for the Respondent No.1 and of sri J.DI'Ieep Kumar, standing counsel for
the Respondent No.2 and of sri Boddulurj srinlvas Rao, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
Between.I
vallabhanI| Bujjiraju, s/o subbanna, Aged about 72 years R/o H.No.538,
vedullakunta, Gopalpuram Manda!,:west Godavari534316.
PetItiOner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by l'ts prI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
secretarI'at.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater vlsakhapatnam Municlpal corporatIOn, VIshakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissl|oner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East POInt, East point colony,
vlsakhapatnam530017. Rep by l'ts Managing partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Busl'ness. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krl'shna poultrjes, old Dalry Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petl'tion under Article 226 of the constitutl'on of lndl'a js fIled praying that
ln the cl'rcumstances stated I'n the affldavlt filed therewl'th, the Hlgh Court may
be pleased to Issue an approprl'ate wrI't Or Order or direction more particularly
'n the nature of 'wrl't of Mandamus' declarl'ng the action of the Respondents
more partICularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein l'n l'ssujng proceedIngS
vI|de B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Bujldlng permI'SSI'On granted to the Respondent No.3 ,'n abeyance
and further dl'recting the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction actIVity solely because of the civ" disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as beI'ng illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, vjolative of principles of Natural Justice, vjolative of the
provisIOnS Of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal CorporatI'On Act, 1955 and
vl'olat,'ve of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constitutl|on of India and
consequently set aside the proceedIngS vl'de
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 Issued
by the Respondent No.2.
peti`tl'on under section 151 of cpc ,s flled praying that in the
cl'rcumstances stated ln the affidavit filed jn support of the petIlion, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operat,on of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 Issued
by Respondent No.2, Pendl'ng dl'sposal of wp 19751 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petitlon coml'ng on for hearI'ng, upon perusI'ng the PetjtIOn and the
affl'davit filed l'n support thereof and the earlI'er Order of the High court
dt.28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.012025 & 2401.2025 made
herein and upon hearl'ng the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH,
AAdPV:oCra:heefo:at:ne^p_:t:t=::=_r =nd of GP MUNCl;A: ;i::I ;N: ^UORnBV:NANDIEHJ
AP for the Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVAS RAO, Advocate fior the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
Between.I
Gadde Lakshmana Rao, s/o G Ramachandra Rao, Aged about 80 years R/o
DD=sOt:c#F:A2A4A7i Gaddevar'l stree"ttayagudem , i i:===ruau= ` ;:nydea:,rSwttelsOt
DistrI'Ct5 3444 7.
PetitIOner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravatl., Guntur DlstrICt.
2. The Greater vlsakhapatnam Munjcjpal corporatlon, vlshakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East pol'nt, East poI'nt Colony,
vlsakhapatnam530017.Rep by its ManagI'ng Partner.
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, KrI|Shna Poultries, old Dalry Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, vlsakhapatnam.
Respondents
petitlon under Article 226 of the constitution of lndla Is filed nra`,im +h+
l'n the cI'rCumstances stated jn the affldavl't filed therewl'th, thefiled praying that
____. _. I,`+Ill IO
L\._I___
be
__._._.,I.II,
pleased to Issue an approprl'ate writ or order or dIreCtl'On
LIT
Hlgh court may
more particularly
jn the nature of 'wrlt of Mandamus' declarI'ng the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein l'n issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keepI'ng the Bul'lding permisslon granted to the Respondent No.3 ,'n abeyance
and further d,'rectjng the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wl'th any further constructl'on actI'Vl'ty solely because of the civ" disputes
pending between the Respondent No 3 and Respondent No.4 as being illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural JustI'Ce, v,'olatjve of the
provjsjons of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporation Act, 1955 and
vjolatl've of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constItution of lndIa and
consequently set aside the proceed,'ngs vl'de
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
petitI'On under Sectl'on 151 of cpc IS filed prayl'ng that In the
circumstances stated in the affldavl't filed ln suppoft of the petl'tion, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operatl'on of proceedlngs vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pendl'ng dl'sposal of WP 19752 of 2024, on the file of the
High court.
The petltlon coming on for hearing, upon peruslng the petltl'on and the
affldavjt filed jn support thereof and the earller order of the HIgh Court
dt.2811.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made
herein and upon hearl'ng the arguments of srI' KALEPU YASHWANTH,
Advocate for the petitIOner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV
AP for the Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standing counsel
for the Respondent No.2.
Between|'
Gadde Munl'swara Rao, s/o Ramachandra Rao, Aged about 68 years R/o
Door No 1101, BoIII'na Variveedhi, yernagudem, west Godavarl'534313.
...PetItiOner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by l|ts prI.Secy.Department of MA& uD,
secretarlat.velagapudI, Amaravatl', Guntur Distrl|ct.
2. The Greater vlsakhapatnam Municipal Corporatl'on, vlshakhapatnam,
Rep by I'tS Comm,SSIOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East polnt, East pol'nt colony,
vl'sakhapatnam530017.Rep by l'ts Managing partner.
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Buslness. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krl'shna poultrjes, old Dalry Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, vI'Sakhapatnam.
...Respondents
petition under Article 226 of the constl|tutI'On of lndIa is filed praying that
ln the clrCumstances stated ln the affldavlt filed therewlth, the Hlgh court may
be pleased to ISSue an approprlate wrlt Or order or dlreCtlOn more partICularly
jn the nature of 'wrI't Of Mandamus' declaring the actI'On of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herel'n l'n jssujng proceedings
v,'de B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeplng the Bulldlng permlsslon grarfted to the Respondent No 3 In abeyance
and further dI'rectl'ng the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wlth any further constructlon actIVIty solely because of the cIVIl dlsputes
pendlng between the Respondent No 3 and Respondent No 4 as belng Illegal,
arbI'trary, unjust, vl'olatjve of principles of Natural JustI'Ce, vl'o'ative of the
provl'sjons of the Greater Hyderabad Munlcjpal corporatl'on Act, 1955 and
vlolatlve of Ar{lcles 14, 21 and 300A of the constltutlon of lndla and
consequently set aside the proceed,ngs vide
B.A. No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021.{eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
lA NO: 1
petition under section 151 of cpc I|S filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affldavII filed in support of the petl'tion, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operatl'on of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pendl'ng disposal of WP 19753 of 2024, on the file of the
High court.
L ,_`.
The petltjon coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petI'tlOn and the
affldavl't filed in support thereof and the order of the Hl'gh court dated
28,ll,2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of Ms.Kalepu yashwanth, Advocate for the
I1:1. _ __ _
Petitloner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, StandI'ng Counsel for the
Respondent No.2.
WRIT
Between.I
Achanta venkateswar Rao, S/o A Satyanarayana, Aged about 62 years R/o
Door No 3/17, Sangayagudem, Devarapalll' MandaI, West Godavarl534313.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by its prI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
secretariat, velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater vI'Sakhapatnam Munl'cipal corporatl'on, vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4th Floor, sukshetra East point, East pol'nt colony,
visakhapatnam530017. Rep by lots Managing partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business R/o D.No 2349/1, Krjshna poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, visakhapatnam.
...Respondents
petitl'on under Artl'cle 226 of the constltutjon of lndIa IS filed praying that
in the clrcumstances stated l|n the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may
be pleased to l'ssue an appropriate writ or order or directl'on more particularly
l'n the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the actI'On of Respondent No.2 herein in jssul'ng proceedlngs
vl'de B .A No.1086/3960/B/Z1"DA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keepI'ng the Buildlng permissl'on granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further dl'recting the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction actl'vity solely because of the clvl'l disputes
pv=o:ad:.:vge boeftwper:nnr.ltnhlea.R:£sp\:_nLd=:: T os , 3& 4 as bei;; ;n:=aI`,l '=r:;::ry:I S=Pn::es:`,
violatIVe of Prl'nciples of Natural JustICe, vlolative of the provisions of the
Greater Hyderabad MunjcjpaI Corpcjratjon Act, 1955 and vl'olatlve of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and consequently set as,'de the
proceedlngs vide B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated
o6.07.2024 l'ssued by the Respondent No.2.
petI|tl'On under sectl'on 151 of cpc l's filed prayl'ng that jn the
cl'rcumstances stated l'n the affldavl't filed in support of the petltIOn, the Hlgh
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedl'ngs vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/Z1"DAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, PendI'ng dl'sposal of wp 19755 of 2024, on the file of the
Hl'gh court.
The petl'tlon com['ng on for heartng, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed l'n support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made hereIn
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the petItiOner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI SRINl<VAs RAO BODDULURl, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
WRIT NO:1
Between.
GoIIa Mohan Rao, S/o Goila subbarayudu, Aged about 81 years R/o Door No
1307, Plot no 44, Kailasagiri road. cooperative Layout, visalakshl' Nagar,
Visakhapatnam530043.
PetitIOner
•AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by`I'tS PrI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
secretarI®at.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur DI®StrjCt.
2. The Greater vI'Sakhapatnam Municipal CorporatI'On, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its comml'ssI'Oner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFIoor, sukshetra East PoI'nt, East poI'nt Colony,
vISakhapatnam530017. Rep by its ManagI'ng Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Busl'ness. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krl'shna poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petitl'on under Article 226 of the constitutlon of India l's filed praying that
in the circumstances stated In the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate wrI't Or Order or d,rectlon more particularly
In the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declarl'ng the actI'On Of the Respondents
more particularly the actlon of Respondent No 2 hereln ln I'SSuI'ng proceedIngs
vide B .A No 1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Building permjssI'On granted to the Respondent No.3 l|n abeyance
and further dI|reCtl'ng the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wl'th any further construction activI'ty solely because of the civ" dlsputes
pend,ng between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as bel'ng illegal,
arbI'trary, unjust, vl'olatl've of prl'ncjples of Natural Justice, vjolatjve of the
provjslons of the Greater Hyderabad MunICiPaI Corporatlon Act, 1955 and
vjolatl've of Articles 14, 21 and 3OOA of the constjtutjon of lndIa and
consequently set aside the proceedlngs vide
..
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZIIVDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
petition under sectllOn 151 of cpc js filed prayIng that In the
circumstances stated I'n the affldavjt fl'led l'n support of the petlI,Ion, the Hl'gh
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vlde
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 I'SSued
by Respondent No.2, Pendl'ng disposal of WP 19756 of 2024, on the file of the
Hl'gh court.
The petI'tl'On coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petltI'On and the
affldavjt filed in support thereof and the order of the Hlgh court dated
28,ll,2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, o9.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearI'ng the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate for
the petl'tioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVAS RAO, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!a±B!IEEI!I!Q±!±!g±ezgz±
Between :
Gadde someswara Rao, S/o G Ramachandra Rao, Aged about 62 years, R/o
Door No 1247, Gadde vari street, Buttayagudem, Ganapavaram Mandal,
West Godavari District534447.
PetItiOner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
SecretarI'at.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Dl®strjct.
2. The Greater vI'Sakhapatnam Municipal corporatlon, vjshakhapatnam,
Rep by l'ts commissIOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East polnt, East Point colony,
visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managl'ng partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Buslness. R/o D.No.2349/1, KrIShna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, visakhapatnam,
Respondents
petl'tl'on under ArtI'CIe 226 of the constitutl'on of India is filed prayI'ng that
in the circumstances stated in the affldavII filed therewlth, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an approprI'ate Writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of 'wrl't of Mandamus' declaring the actl'on of the Respondents
more particularly the actI'On Of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Bujldl'ng permissIOn granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further djrectl'ng the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wl'th any further constructI'On actlvity solely because of the civ" disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being Illegal,
arblltrary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justl'ce, violatIVe Of the
provl'sions of the Greater Hyderabad Municl'pal corporatIOn Act, 1955 and
vI'Olatl'Ve of Arflcles 14, 21 and ~300A of the constl'tution of India and
consequently set aside the proceedlngs vI'de
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/Z1"DAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2,
lA NO: 1 OF 2024..
petl'tion under sectl'on 151 of cpc Is filed prayl'ng that jn the
circumstances stated in the affidavl't flled in support of the petI|tl'On, the Hlgh
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedl'ngs vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending dI'SPOSal Of WP 19767 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition comIng on for hearing, upon perusing the petItjOn and the
affidavit filed jn support thereof and the order of the High court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.O1.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of sri Kalepu yashwanth, Advocate for the
l|_1:I.: _ __ _
Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of sRl''tw`J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No.2.
WRIT 19798
Between.I
Lakamsani Krishnaveni, w/o chakradhara Rao, Aged about 71 years R/o
Door No 8482, Srj Satya saj Nivas old CBI Down, vl'sakhapatnam530 017.
PetItiOner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by ItS PrI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
secretariat, velagapudi, Amarava{i, Guntur District.
2. The Greater vlsakhapatnam Municipal corporation, vI'Shakhapatnam,
Rep by I'tS CommI'SSlOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4th FIoor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by l'ts Managing partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, KrI'Shna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petition under ArtI'Cle 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the cI'rCumStanCeS Stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or dIreCtiOn more Particularly
in the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No,1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 jn abeyance
and further directing the Respondent`No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the civil disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being illegal,
arbl'trary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justice, violative of the
Provisions Of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and
violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and
Consequently set asl'de the proceedings vide B.A.No.1086/
3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued by the
Respondent No.2.
lANO: 1 OF 2024:
t'J
petition under Section 151'Jof cpc is filed praying that In the
circumstances stated In the affldavI't filed in suppon of the petitionl the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending dl'sposal of wp 19798 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petjtjon coming on for hearl'ng, upon peruslng the petItIOn and the
affldavl't filed jn support thereof and the order of the H,gh court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03 012025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearIng the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the petl'tjoner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No 2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULUR', Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
Between.
Eedala Narayana Rao, s/o. E. Veifa1'u, Aged about 67 years, R/o. Door. No.
21311, Munjsibu Garl' veedhi, Katheru, East Godavarl' 533105.
...PetItiOner
AND
1. The state of A.P., Rep. by ItS Prl.secy.Department of MA & uD,
secretarla{, velagapudj, Amaravatj, Guntur DIStrJCt.
2. The Greater vISakhapatnam MunI'CjPal Corporation, vlshakhapatnam,
Rep by its commlSSIOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FlatNo502, 4thFloor, sukshetra East polnt, East pol'nt colony,
vl'sakhapatnam530017.Rep`by its ManagIng Partner.
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna poultries, old Dalry Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, vlsakhapatnam.
...Respondents
petl'tjon under Article 226 of the constl'tutlon of India js filed praylng that
ln the clrCumstances stated ln the affldavlt filed therewlth, the HIgh Court may
be pleased to Issue an approprlate wrlt Or order or dl'rectI'On more partl'cularly
l'n the nature of 'wrl't of Mandamus' declarI'ng the action of the Respondents
.~f ..
more partICularly the action of Reslpondent No.2 hereln l'n issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 l'n abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construct,'on activity solely because of the cI'V" disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being IllegaI,
arbl'trary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justice, violative of the
provI'Sl'OnS Of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporatIOn Act, 1955 and
violatI'Ve Of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constitutl'on of India and
consequently set aside the proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
J4LELO.I 1 OF 2Q2±:
petI'tiOn under Section 151 of CPC IS filed praying that in the
cl'rcumstances stated in the affldavII filed in support of the petI'tiOn, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operatl'on of proceedI'ngS \,tide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/Z"DA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, PendI'ng dI'SPOSal of WP 19801 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petItI'On and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate for
the petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standing Counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for
the Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!d!B!I PETITION NO: 19873 OF 2Lg24
Between:
AIIuri Rao Venkata, S/o AIIuri Rathaiah, Aged about 72 years, R/o Door No
1230, Kornaqndam, Buttayagudem, Ganapavaram MandaI, West GodavarI
5344471
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. b'y its prI.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Distrl'ct.
2. The Greater Visakhapatnam MunicI'Pal Corporatl'on, vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commISSiOner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4thFIoor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its ManagIng Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, VIsakhapatnam.
>.. i
Respondents
petition under ArfI'Cle 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
l'n the circumstances stated in the affldavlt filed therewl'th, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly
in the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declarl'ng the action of the Respondents
more partI'Culafly the action of Respondent No.2 hereIn in issuing proceedlngs
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the BuI'ldlng Permission granted to the Respondent No.3 I'n abeyance
and further directI'ng the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
wl|th any further constructlon actlvity solely because of the civ" disputes
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justl'ce, violative of the
provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporation Act, 1955 and
vl'olatl've of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constitutl'on of lndla and
consequently set asIde the proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffI®Ce299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
lA NO: 1OF 2024:
petition under section 151 of CPC I'S filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedIngS Vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of WP 19873 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed In Support thereof and the order of the Hlgh Court dated
28,ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made hereI'n
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate for
the petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND IJRBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standing counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for
the Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!fl£B!I PETITION NO.I 19878 OF 2024
Between.I
Achanta Ramarao, s/o Jagadeeswarrarao, Aged about 72 years R/o Door No
3146, GandhI' Nagaram, yernagudem, west Godavari534313.
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra pradesh, Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA
and UD, SecretarIat.Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater Vl'sakhapatnam MunI'CiPaI Corporation, vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms h and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4th FIoor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, KrI'Shna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petition under Article 226 of the ConstitutIOn Of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to ISSue an appropriate Writ or order or dIreCtlOn more Particularly
in the nature of 'wrjt of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuI|ng Proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the BuIlding Permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No ,3 to stop the work and not to
proceed with any further construction activI'ty SOlely because of the cl'vII
disputes pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as
being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, vlolatIVe Of Principles of Natural JustI'Ce,
violative of the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporatI'On
Act,1955 and vl'olatjve of Articles 14', 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India
and consequently set aslde the proceedings vide B
A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6,07.2024 issued
by the Respondent No.2.
Ego: 1 OEan,I
petition under sectlon 151 of CPC Is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedIngS Vlde B.A.
No.1086/3960/B/ZWDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 issued by
Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of WP 19878 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearl'ng, upon perusl'ng the petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made herein
and upon hearing the arguments of KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate for the
Petitioner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standing Counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for
the Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
_vyRIT PETITION NO: 19950 OF 2024
Betwee n :
Lanka Srinivasa Rao, S/o SrIramulu, Aged about 66 years, R/o Door No 313130,
Saibaba Street, Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam530001.
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its Prl.Secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.Ve[agapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Vishakhapatnam,
Rep by its Commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
FIat.No.502, 4th Floor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
VisakhapatnamL 530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, S/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, Old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavII filed thereWith, the High Court may
be pleased to I'SSue an approprfate wrII Or Order or dlreCtlOn more partICularly
in the nature of 'wrl't of Mandamus' declarlng the actI'On of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vlde B .A No.1086/3960/B/ZWDAV2021 (eofflce299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeping the Bujldlng permISSI'On granted to the Respondent No.3 Ion abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction actIVity solely because of the cjv" dI'SPutes
pendl'ng between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as beIng illegal,
arbl'trary, unjust, vI'OIatjve of principles of Natural Justice, vI'OIatjve of the
provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal corporation Act, 1955 and
violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the constl'tutjon of lnd,'a and
consequently set asI'de the proceedI'ngS vlde
B.A. No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 ISSued
by the Respondent No.2.
hH ITELr L m EmEH+
petition under section 151 of cpc js filed praying that jn the
c,'rcumstances stated I'n the affidavl't fl'led l'n support of the petllion, the Hlgh
court may be pleased to suspend the operatl'on of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024 l'ssued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of wp 19950 of 2024, on the file of the
High court.
The petit,'on comIng on for hearing, upon perusing the petItl'On and the
affidav,'t filed jn support thereof and the order of the Hl|gh court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.01.2025 & 24.01.2025 made here,n
and upon hearing the arguments of sri srI'kalepu Yashwanth, Advocate for
trees:oe:i£opnn:rNa^n4d ^O:^G_P£ T_u.N?I_P_AL ADMN ;;5 ri£±::I \=liv^u::cfao\: ttho:
Respondent No.1 and of SRI J.DILEEP KUMAR, Standl'ng counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and of SRI BODDULURI SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for
the Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
!!!B!lPETITION NO: 19959 OEjRE
Betwee n :
potluri Narasimha Rao, S/o Late +`Krishnamurfhy, Aged about 63 years R/o
Door No 281410, Opp. Melody Theatre, suryabagh, vl'sakhapatnam530020.
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of A.P., Rep. by its prl.secy.Department of MA& UD,
Secretariat.velagapudi, Amaravatl', Guntur District.
2. The Greater vI'SakhaPatnam Munlcipal corporation, vI'Shakhapatnam,
Rep by its commissioner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4th Floor, sukshetra East Point, East Pol'nt Colony,
Visakhapatnam530017. Reb <by its Managing partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, s/a Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krl'shna poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
petition under ArtICIe 226 of the constitution of India is filed praying that
in the clrcumstances stated in the affldavIt filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or dIreCtIOn more Particularly
in the nature of 'writ of Mandamus' declarlng the action of the Respondents
more particularly the actllOn Of Respondent No.2 hereIn In issuing proceedlngs
vide B .A No.1086/3960/B/Z1/YDA72o21 (eoffice299800) dated o6.07.2024
keeplng the Building permlSSIOn granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the civII dISPuteS
pending between the Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 as being illegal,
arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of Natural Justice, vl'olative of the
provisions of the Greater Hyderabad MunICiPaI Corporation Act, 1955 and
violatlve of Artl'cles 14, 21 and 300A of the constltution of India and
consequently set aside the proceedlngs vl'de
.
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffI'Ce299800) dated o6.07.2024 ,ssued
by the Respondent No.2.
petjtIOn under section 151 of cpc Is filed prayllng that l'n the
cJrCumstances stated ln the affldavlt fIIed ln support of the petltlon, the HIgh
court may be pleased to suspend the operatlon of proceedlngs vfde
B A No 1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAV2021 (eoffice299800) dated o6 07 2024 ISSued
by Respondent No 2, Pendlng dlsposal of wp 19959 of 2024, on the file of the
High court. "
The petI'tlOn comI'ng on for hearlng, upon perusIng the Petl'tlon and the
affidavlI filed jn support thereof and the order of the High court dated
28.ll.2024,12.12.2024, 03.01.2025, 09.012025 & 24.01.2025 made hereln
and upon hearIng the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the petltloner and of GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent Nol and of SRI JDILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No 2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURI, Advocate for the
Respondent Mos.3 & 4.
Between.I
DaparthI Satyanarayana, s/o D Narayana, Aged about 66 years R/o Door No
231, Ramalayam veedhI', Gowrlpatnam, west Godavarl534313.
PetItIOn er
AND
1 The state of AP, Rep by Its PrlsecyDepartment of MA& uD,
secretarl'at.velagapudl', Amaravati, Guntur Dl'strict.
2 The Greater vI'sakhapatnam Munlcl'pal corporatIOn, VJShakhapatnam,
Rep by l'ts comml'ssl'oner.
3. M/s.Hayagreeva Farms and Developers, Door.No.62020/1,
Flat.No.502, 4th Floor, Sukshetra East Point, East Point Colony,
VIsakhapatnam530017. Rep by its Managing Partner
4. Ch. Jagadeeswarudu, S/o Rama Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ.
Business. R/o D.No.2349/1, Krishna Poultries, old Dairy Farm, Adarsh
Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may
be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more parficulariy
in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the Respondents
more particularly the action of Respondent No.2 herein in issuing proceedings
vide B .A No.1086/3960/BZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024
keeping the Building permission granted to the Respondent No.3 in abeyance
and further directing the Respondent No.3 to stop the work and not to proceed
with any further construction activity solely because of the civil disputes
pending between the Respondent Nos,3& 4 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust,
violative of Principles of Natural Jljstice, violative of the provisions of the
Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act,1955 and violative of Articles
14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aslde the
proceedings vide B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDA/2021 (eoffice299800) dated
06.07.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2.
lANO: 1 OF2O24:
_
Petition under Section 151 of CPC is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings vide
B.A.No.1086/3960/B/ZlrvDAI2021 (eoffice299800) dated 06.07.2024 issued
by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of WP 19960 of 2024, on the file of the
High Court.
The petjtI'On coml'ng on for hearI'ng, upon peruslng the petition and the
affldavlt filed ln support thereof and the order of the Hlgh court dated
I+
28112024,1212 2024, 03 012025, 09 012025 & 24 012025 made herel'n
and upon hearIng the arguments of SRI KALEPU YASHWANTH, Advocate
for the petltlOner and of GP MUNCjPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP for the
Respondent Not and of SRI JDILEEP KUMAR, Advocate for the
Respondent No 2 and of SRI SRINIVAS RAO BODDULURI, Advocate for the
Respondent Nos.3 & 4, Court made the followlng,I
COMMON ORDER.I
ff At reqLJeSt of learned counsel on either side, post these matters
on 13.02.2025 at o2.15 p.m. for hearing.
]nterfm order granted earlfer IS extended tIIf then."
.i
i
/
A SD/K.SRIN'VAS¢,RAJ'J
//TRUE copy// ASSISTF#3SR:_G_I.S_TrR_AR
I
SECTION OFFICER
For AS
To
1. One cc to sri. Ajay Kumar Kanaparthl, Advocate [opucJ
2. One cc to sri. M.R.K. Chakravarthy, Advocate [opucJ
3. Two cos to GP for Mun,c,Opal AdmIm'Stratl'on & urban
__ '' ' `^ \J\ |JC1\ I
Development,High court ofAndhra pradesh. foul
I _
4. One cc to sri K.Madhava Reddy, standlng counsel [OPUC]
5. One cc to sn' v.surya K,ran, standlng counsel [opuc]
6. One cc to sri Kalepu yashwanth, Advocate [opuc]
7. one cc to sri J.Dileep Kuma`f,:gAdvocate. [opuc]
8. One cc to srj srI'njVas Rao Bodduluri, Advocate. [opucJ
9. Two cos to GP for Revenue, HI'gh Court ofAP [ouTJ
10 [ouTJ Two cos to Advocate General, Hlgh court ofAndhra pradesh
ll. onesparecopy
HIGH COURT
|+ L
VS,J
DATED: 06/02/2025
POST THESE MATTERS ON 13.02.2025 AT 02.15 P.M. FOR HEARING
ORDER
WPNos.15026,16982,170O8,17009,17011,17023,19744,19745,19746I 19751119752,19753,19755,19756,19767,19798,19801,19873,19878, 19881] 19950,19959,19960 of 2024 . ;_jRTapr 12 FEB !lj/o INTERIM ORDER EXTENDED