Sri Venkata Sai Automobile Works v. Theandhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.11286 OF 2012 DATED:20-8-2015 Between:

Sri Venkata Sai Automobile Works Plot No.19, Autonagar, Renigunta Road Tirupathi, rep. by its Proprietor Sri K. Umapathi ... Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director Parisrama Bhavan, Baseerbagh, Hyderabad and others ... Respondents ... Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: None appeared COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NOs.1 and 2: Mr. P. Roy Reddy, Standing Counsel for APIIC COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT NOs.3 to 5 : None appeared THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed by the allottee of Plot No.19 of Autonagar, Renigunta Road, Tirupati, with the grievance that respondent Nos.1 and 2 have turned a blind eye to the encroachments of the land forming part of Autonagar under the control and management of the said respondents.

At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Mr. P. Roy Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, on instructions submitted that two individuals have encroached on fringe area of Autonagar and raised two structures and that when they were sought to be evicted they have filed O.S. No.795 of 2010 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, and obtained an order of injunction. However, he is unable to state whether the said suit is pending or disposed of. In my opinion, respondent Nos.1 and 2 should have been vigilant in preventing the encroachments of the public property under their control. Lack of such vigilance appears to be the reason for the encroachments.

In the absence of any counter affidavit filed by them, it is not known as to what steps respondent Nos.1 and 2 have taken to get the suit dismissed. At least after this writ petition was filed, respondent Nos.1 and 2 should have woken up from slumber and initiated appropriate measures for evicting the encroachers. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are accordingly directed to ensure that the encroachers are evicted in accordance with law at the earliest possible time.

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P. No.14250 of 2012 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20-8-2015 bnr