Akkishetty Kantamma v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN :PRESENT:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WP .NO: 23187 of 2015 Between:

Akkishetty Kantamma W/o Late Rangaiah, r/o Suravarapupalle village and Gram Panchayat, Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District.

..... Petitioner AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District.

3 Suravarapupalle Gram Panchayat, rep. by its Secretary, Suravarapupalle village, Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, 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 impugned Notice dt. 26-122014 issued by the 3rd respondent directing the petitioner to remove the thatched house and cattle shed situated within Suravarapupalle Gram Panchayat, bearing Assessment No.

314 of Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District, which is in existence for the past more than four decades, without following the procedure contemplated under the Law, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the same by directing the 3rd respondent not to take any coercive steps without following the due process of Law. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate for the Petitioner, GP for Panchayat Raj (AP) for Respondent No.1 and Sri D. Seshadri, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.

Print the name of Sri D. Seshadri, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 3.

The petitioner contends that partially, the structure is removed. If only partial structure is removed and full structure is not already removed, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained. The petitioner shall not try to make any construction under the guise of status quo.

At request of the learned Standing Counsel, post after one (1) week for instructions.

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1 The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District.

3 The Secretary, Suravarapupalle Gram Panchayat, Suravarapupalle village, Yeddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. (Addressees 1 to 3 BY RPAD) 4 One CC to Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate (OPUC) 5 Two CCs to the G.P. for Panchayat Raj (AP), High Court, Hyderabad. (OUT) 6 One spare copy.

nnr HIGH COURT PNR,J DATED: 27-7-2015

NOTE: Post after one week for instructions

ORDER

W.P.NO. 23187 OF 2015 DIRECTION HIGH COURT Nnr Date of Drafting : 28-07-2015 PNR,J

DATED: 27-7-2015 NOTE: Post after one week for instructions

ORDER

W.P.NO. 23187 OF 2015 DIRECTION