Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Madugula Prabhudasu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 February, 2025
APHC010087372025 Bench Sr.No:-6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
[3483]
AT AMARAVATI
WP(PIL) NO: 38 of 2025
Madugula Prabhudasu ...Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents
**********
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy representing Mr. Veladi Sai Sri Harsha Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP for Medical, Health & FW, Smt. S. Pranathi (Spl.GP) CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 19th February, 2025 PC:
The present petition purportedly filed in public interest seeks to question G.O.Rt.No.82, dated 12.02.2025 whereby the earlier proposal to construct 100 bedded hospital upon acquisition of five acres of land for an amount of Rs.2.50 Crores was given up and a decision taken to increase the capacity of the existing hospital by making some structural changes and after affecting some demolition of the existing hospital building.
The decision has been taken by the Government considering the fact that the existing 50 bedded hospital was located in the heart of the town and was convenient to the people.2
HCJ & RC, J WP(PIL)_38_2025
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the report earlier submitted, it has clearly been pointed out that expansion of the capacity of the hospital from 50 beds to 100 beds would be more convenient at the new place and it was only pursuant to such a report that the acquisition of the land had taken place and even a foundation stone has been laid.
It is thus stated that considering the requirement of the future, the decision as is reflected in G.O.Rt.No.82 is totally perverse.
3. On going through the relevant material on record and in particular G.O.Rt.No.82, dated 12.02.2025 which is impugned, we do not find any perversity as this is a decision which is taken by the Government in its normal functioning wherein a reason has been given that the capacity of the hospital could be increased from 50 to 100 beds in the existing hospital after affecting certain demolitions and raising an ancillary building which would create space which is approximately 60000 square feet. The new block that is proposed is G+4. The petition is found to be without any merit, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J Vjl