Sakhineti Srinivasa Raju, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT W.P.No.29638 OF 2016 ORDER:

Heard counsel for petitioners and respondents. The petitioner challenges notice dated 29.08.2016 issued by respondent No.6.

I have perused the averments in the writ affidavit and also the stand taken by 6th respondent against the writ prayer. Prima facie, this Court is of the view that the notice is particularly one in the nature of information to petitioner not to undertake house construction at D.No.3-27 in R.S.No.187/ 1 of Ravulapadu Village, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District.

The petitioner could not and, in fact, did not contend that the 6th respondent lacks jurisdiction to issue a notice. This Court is not proposing to examine the merits of the matter. Hence, the Court is satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by this order.

The parties are directed to maintain status quo as on today in all respects for a period of twelve weeks from today. The petitioner is given four weeks time from today to file explanation and the explanation is required to be considered by the 6th respondent pass appropriate orders within four weeks from the date of receipt of such reply.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.

____________ S.V.BHATT, J Dt.31.10.2016 Lrkm