Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kunapareddy Radha Rani vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh And ... on 24 January, 2025
1
APHC010237602024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 12104/2024
Between:
Kunapareddy Radha Rani, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Government of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G VIVEKANAND
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. KOTHAPALLI SAI SRI HARSHA
2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
The Court made the following:
2
ORDER :
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
".... to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not deciding the appeal filed under rule 17 of the Andhra Pradesh Regularization of unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2020 and in not granting interim direction as prayed for pending disposal of the appeal, as highly illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the official respondents to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 29.12.2022 forthwith...."
2. The case of the petitioner is as follows:
a) The petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.45/2013 before the learned XV Additional District Judge at Nuzvid against the unofficial respondents and others for partition of the joint family properties, specifically items 1 and 3 of A schedule and B and C schedule properties into 12 equal shares and to deliver vacant possession of one such share to her by evicting the defendants, who are to be found to be in possession of the property that would be allotted to the share of the plaintiff and allot item No.2 of plaint A schedule property to the share of the plaintiff by working out equities and the same is pending for adjudication.
b) Meanwhile, the unofficial respondents along with some other family members started developing land in an extent of Ac.1.82 cents in R.S.No.194/11 and land in an extent of Ac.1.90 cents in R.S.No.193/17 of Nadimi Tiruvuru, totaling an extent of Ac.3.72 cents. When the petitioner came 3 to know about the same, she submitted a petition on 18.11.2020 to the 4th respondent/Commissioner, Tiruvuru Nagar Panchayat, requesting him not to accord any approval for any layout in respect of the above said property.
Subsequently, on 10.02.2022, a notice under Section 184 of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 was issued to all the parties involved. The petitioner gave a reply on 14.02.2022 stating that she was not involved in making a layout and requested the 4th respondent to take action against the erring persons. On 23.09.2022, the 4th respondent issued a public notice calling for objections, and on 24.09.2022, the petitioner submitted objections informing the above said facts and pendency of O.S.No.45/2013 and citing Rule 6(14) of G.O.Ms.No.10 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M) Department, dated 08.01.2020, which stipulates that any sites under legal litigation/disputes regarding ownership are not eligible for regularization. However, the 4th respondent refused to consider her objections, vide endorsement dated 28.11.2022. Questioning the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Rule 17 of the Andhra Pradesh Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2020 before the appellate authority i.e. the 2nd respondent herein on 29.12.2022, seeking a direction to the 4th respondent not to approve any building plan or any application received for construction of building in the land to an extent of Ac.3.72 cents in R.S.Nos.193/17 and 194/11 of Nadimi Tiruvuru, Tiruvuru Nagar Panchayat, NTR District. However, no orders have been passed on the appeal till date. 4
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that as per Rule 17(4) of G.O.Ms.No.10 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M) Department, dated 08.01.2020, all the appeals shall be disposed of within forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of appeal. Therefore, the petitioner requests this Court to direct the respondent authorities to dispose of the appeal dated 29.12.2022, which is pending before the 2nd respondent.
5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that the respondent authorities will dispose of the appeal dated 29.12.2022.
6. For better appreciation, Rule 17(4) of G.O.Ms.No.10, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M) Department, dated 08.01.2020, extracted hereunder:
"All the appeals shall be disposed off within Forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of appeal."
7. As per Rule 17(4) of G.O.Ms.No.10, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M) Department, dated 08.01.2020, all the appeals shall be disposed of within 45 days from the date of receipt of the appeal. However, in view of the fact that the appeal is still pending since 2022, instead of going into the merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ 5 Petition by directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the appeal preferred by the petitioner dated 29.12.2022 under Rule 17 of Andhra Pradesh Regularization of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2020.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
__________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 24.01.2025 KGR