Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 734 (AP)

B. Shakuntala, W/o. B. Nanjappa v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-11-02

A.V.SESHA SAI

body2021
ORDER : Heard Sri P. Narahari Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Municipality, apart from perusing the material available on record. 2. According to the petitioners, they are having residential plots in Hanuman Nagar, Melapuram, within Hindupur Municipality, Hindupur, Anantapuramu District. It is further stated that a layout was sanctioned in the year 1984, vide L.P.No.589 of 1984 in respect of the plots indicated therein including the plots of the petitioners in respect of Sy.Nos.391/1 and 396/1A. It is further stated that in the said layout, an extent of Ac.00.25.9 cents had been left as open space for construction of schools, parks, library, etc., for the public utility. It is also stated that a registered gift deed was also registered on 26.11.1984 in favour of Executive Engineer, represented by Gram Panchayat, Kotnur village and the said Kotnur Gram Panchayat was merged in respondent No.2-Municipality and presently, the subject land falls within the limits of Hindupur Municipality. The grievance of the petitioners precisely in the present Writ Petition is that though in the sanctioned layout, the above mentioned subject land had been earmarked for construction of schools, parks, library, etc., now, the respondent-authorities are attempting to construct Waste Disposal Unit and Garbage Vehicle Parking in Sy.Nos.391/1 and 396/1A of Hanuman Nagar, Melapuram, within Hindupur Municipality, Hindupur, Anantapuramu District. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the action impugned in the present Writ Petition on the part of the respondent-Municipality is a patent violation of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a number of decisions and the decision of this Court in Telecom Colony Residents Welfare Association and another Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, 2021 (4) ALT 225 (AP). It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners herein, along with certain other residents of the locality covered by the subject layout plan, submitted a representation dated 08.09.2021 to the Municipal Commissioner and despite the same, the respondent-authorities, without passing any orders on the said representation, are proceeding with the construction of Solid Waste Disposal Unit and Garbage Vehicle Parking in the subject land. 4. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and taking into consideration the nature of controversy in the present Writ Petition and keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in the above referred Telecom Colony Residents Welfare Association’s case (1 supra), this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition, directing respondent No.2-Municipality to verify the representation dated 08.09.2021 submitted by the petitioners herein along with certain others and pass appropriate orders/take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. Till a decision is taken on the said representation, status quo as on today with regard to the subject land shall be maintained. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed.