Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sai Lakshmi Women Self Help Group vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 11 February, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 3585 OF 2025
Between:
Sai Lakshmi Women Self Help Group, R/o. Door No.20/27, Akula Street,
Kadapa City, Y.S.R District rep., its President, Bandaru Naga Mallika, W/o.
Bandaru Siva Kesava, aged about 45 years.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Municipal
Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,
Amaravathi, Guntur District.
2. The Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Kadapa, Y.S.R District, rep., by its
Commissioner.
3. The Town Planning Officer, Kadapa Municipal Corporation, Kadapa
Y.S.R District.
4. The Municipal Corporation Primary School, 18th Ward, Kadapa City,
Y.S.R District rep., by its Head Master.
5. The Project Officer, Sarva Siksha Abhayan, Kadapa, Y.S.R. District.
...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, order or direction more
particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the
Proceedings in Roc.No.1516/2025/G1, dated 07.02.2025 issued by the
respondent No.2 ordering the Petitioner to vacate the premises of the
/ respondent No.4 School and handover the R.O. Water Plant equipment
Machinery immediately to the respondent No.5 stating that several
complaints have been received from the parents of the students and the
Hp|d«,Master of the respondent No.4 School that the R.O. Water Plant is
causing' disturbance to the School environment, without putting the
petitioner on prior notice about the alleged disturbance at any point time
from the year, 2016
as arbitrary, illegal, violative of the principles of natural
justice and contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being
violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under
Articles, 14, 19 and 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and
consequently set aside the Proceedings in Roc.No.1516/2025/G1, dated
07.02.2025 issued by the respondent No.2.
lA NO: 1 OF 7()9R
Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed- iin support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased
may be pleased stay all further proceedings in
pursuance of the Proceedings in Roc.No.1516/2025/G1, dated 07.02.2025
issued by the respondent No.2, pending disposai of the above Writ Petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V R REDDY KOWURI
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN
DEV
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4: SRI A S C BOSE (SC FOR
municipal CORPORATIONS)
Counsel for the Respondent No.5: MRS. SUDHARANI
The Court made the following: ORDER
1
APHC010068192025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 3585/2025
Between:
Sai Lakshmi Women Self Help Group ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.VR REDDY KOVVURI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
The Court made the following:
■dt
2
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
''....may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings in Roc No.1516/2025/G1 dated 07.02.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 ordering the Petitioner to vacate the premises of the respondent No. 4 School and handover the R.O Water Plant equipment Machinery immediately to the respondent No. 5 stating that several complaints have been received from the parents of the students and the Head Master of the respondent No.4 School that the R.O Water Plant is causing disturbance to the School environment without putting the petitioner on prior notice about the alleged disturbance at any point time from the year 2016 as arbitrary illegal violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19 and 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Proceedings in Roc No 1516/2025/G1 dated 07.02.2025 issued by the respondent No 2 and pass such "
02. The case of the petitioner is that they made a representation to the Municipal Standing Committee for establishment of a water plant, considering their representation the Municipal Standing Committee has passed a resolution to allot Ac.0.001 14 cents land in one corner of the 5*'^ respondent school to establish a Mineral Water Plant vide resolution No.181 in ROC.No.1243/2016/G1, dated 20.10.2016 after obtaining prior consent from the Head Master of the School.3
While things thus stand, the 2 nd respondent has issued proceedings- cum-order vide Roc.No.1516/2025/G1, dated 07.2.2025 directing to evict the water plant from the school premises. The respondent authorities without following the due process of law and without assigning any reason have issued proceedings directing the petitioner to vacate the school premises and also seized the water plant machinery. As such, the petitioner prays to pass appropriate orders protecting her interest.
03. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and Sri A.S.C.Bose learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Mrs.Sudharani, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No,5.
04. Today, when the Counsel matter came up for hearing, the learned Standing appearing on behalf of the 2'^^ respondent furnished the copy of the instructions, wherein it is stated that it ISi come to the notice of the 2 nd respondent that the water plant installed by the petitioner is causing disturbances to the school atmosphere and creating inconvenience for the school children. The i instructions further shows that the water plant should have been constructed in the open space within the school premises as per the estimates approved by the Municipal Corporation but contrary to the same the petitioner organization by occupying the school room belonging to the school running the commercial water plant which isi clear violation of terms 4 nd and conditions. Consequently the 2 respondent issued notice to the petitioner dated 02.01.2025 and 10.01.2025 directing the petitioner organization to vacate the school premises but despite receiving notices the petitioner neither responded nor vacated the premises. The instructions further shows that the 2""' respondent followed the due process of law by issuing proceedings vide Roc.No.1516/2025/G1, dated 07.02.2025. But as the nd petitioner did not vacate the premises, the 2 respondent-Municipal Corporation seized the water plant by duly following the procedure by way of panchanamma. The petitioner organization was granted Rs.3,00,000/- through MPLADS. If any additional amount was spent on the water plant machinery.
this Corporation will return the machinery to the petitioner.
05. Perused the material available on record.
nd
06. On a perusal of the record, it shows that the only grievance of the 2 respondent authority is that in view of the construction of water plant in the I school premises it is causing disturbances to the school atmosphere and creating nuisance and inconvenience to the school going children. Infact the said water plant should have been constructed in the open space within the school premises with a shed as per the estimates approved by the Engineers.
It the contention of the respondent authorities that the petitioner by occupying the class room in the school is running commercial water plant which is clear violation of terms and conditions.5
07. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the water plant is seized by the respondent authorities, without going into the merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to hand to the petitioner i over the water plant machinery seized by them in accordance with law.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the 2 nd respondent-Municipal Corporation seeking to handover the water plant machinery and on such representation being made the 2"" respondent shall consider the same and handover the water plant machinery seized by them i in accordance with law.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions closed.
pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall Stand SOI- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER Municipal Administration u Department, Secretariat Buildings Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District
2. me Commissioner, Kadapa Municipal Corporation Kadapa, Y.S.R District, rep., by its. ^ Y^S f^District*^^^''^^ Officer, Kadapa Municipal Corporation Kadapa, KadapfcV^ Y%®.R Disfricr' School, 18th Ward, 6 One CC^to SR?V®R ?■ ^ ^ r®IL® Reddy KovvuriAbhayan, AdvocateKadapa, [OPUCl Y.S.R. District. ^ [ORJC]" ^ S 0 Bose, SC for Municipal Corporations Advocate
8. One CC to Mrs. Sudharani, Advocate [OPUCl ^10. Three PradSh^[OUTf CD Copies '^'^f^cipal Admn Urban Dev High Court of Andhra TF HIGH COURT DATED:11/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.3585 of 2025 O' 5 0 5 MAR 2(l?5 "'i ^ . Current deciion DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS