- ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for respondents and perused the material placed on record. 2. The case of the petitioners is that respondent Nos. 1 to 7 are not taking any legal action against the respondent Nos.9 to 11 who are constructing a house in their land in Sy.No.168/2A in DSP Bungalow street of Chintaparthi Village of Vayalpad Mandal of Chittoor District without there being any permission or sanctioned plan from the 7 th respondent – Gram Panchayat is contrary to law. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the unofficial Respondent Nos.9 to 11 are trying to make construction not only the land held by them to an extent of Ac.0.06 cents but by occupying road margin / public road of the Gram Panchayat Chintaparthi Village, for which the petitioners approached official respondents by submitting representation on 12.11.2018 for appropriate action against illegal construction of the unofficial respondents and also encroaching the land of the road margin by the unofficial respondents. Even after receipt of the representation, respondent authorities neither considered the representation nor stopped the illegal construction of the unofficial respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the 7 th respondent –Gram Panchayat issued notices dated 13.11.2018 and also 23.02.2019 stating that the 9 th respondent herein directed to submit link documents for consideration of the application for approval / sanction plan to the respondents and also directed to stop the construction till conducting survey and issuance of sanction plan. The petitioners also submitted action taken report of the Mandal Engineering Officer, wherein it is stated that one Sri K. Chinnarami Reddy making construction by encroaching one feet for one column footing all other column and laid footing work adjacent to CC road. He further submits that even though notices were issued by the Gram Panchayat, no action was initiated. Hence the writ petition. - 3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 4 filed counter-affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.4, wherein it is stated as under: “3. He further submits that even though notices were issued by the Gram Panchayat, no action was initiated. Hence the writ petition. - 3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 4 filed counter-affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.4, wherein it is stated as under: “3. In reply to Paras 3 and 4 of the affidavit, it is submitted that the other purchasers of the above land have raised residential houses in the above site and the mother of the respondents 10 & 11 and grandmother of the 9 th respondent has also raised a residential house in a portion of the land purchased by them. As the above land is a purchased land in an open auction conducted by the District Board. The purchasers yield unfettered rights over the same and Gram Panchayat has no power to lay a road in the land purchased through auction. The widow of the purchaser is at liberty to execute a Will in favour of her grandson (9 th respondent) over the above property and petitioner cannot raise any objection in the matter. - Soon after the execution of the impugned Will the 9 th respondent has pulled down his old structure and intended to raise a new structure in the area purchased by his grandfather in an auction conducted by the District Board. I also submit that the petitioners have not raised any objection over the houses constructed by the other purchasers and filed this petition before this Hon'ble High Court at a time when the 9th respondent started construction on unsustainable grounds. The other contentions raised by the petitioner in these paras are all baseless and untenable and aimed at distorting the attention of this Hon'ble High Court. 4. In reply to Paras 5 and 6 of the affidavit, it is submitted that the contention of the petitioners that the disputed property is a Government land and public property is far from true and baseless. The Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction over the same. It is a purchased land, purchased in an open auction conducted by the District Board. The grandfather of the 9 th respondent and father of the 10 and 11 th respondents has purchased the same for a consideration of Rs.3,600/- in the year 1959. The Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction over the same. It is a purchased land, purchased in an open auction conducted by the District Board. The grandfather of the 9 th respondent and father of the 10 and 11 th respondents has purchased the same for a consideration of Rs.3,600/- in the year 1959. There is no illegality or impropriety in the matter and as such the action of the respondents in taking up construction over the disputed site cannot be construed as illegal and impermissible and Government cannot be expected to keep them in fetters and to restrain them. As there is no gravity in the complaint of the petitioners no further action was contemplated in the matter. The impugned construction cannot be termed as illegal and the Gram Panchayat is not competent to meddle or tinker with the rights of the respondents 9 to 11 in the matter. I further submit that as the land was vacant on ground for a long period, the villagers used to make ingress and egress through the above land and mere usage of the land as a Rastha cannot take awaythe rights of the respondents 9 to 11” 4. Respondent No.10 filed counter wherein it is stated as under: “4. I submit that the other purchasers of the above land have raised residential houses in the above site and the mother of the respondents 10 & 11 and grand grandmother of the 9 th respondent have also raised a residential house in a portion of the land purchased by them. The above land is a purchased land in an open auction conducted by the District Board. The purchasers yield unfettered rights over the same and Gram Panchayat has no power to lay a road in the land purchased through auction. The widow of the purchaser is at liberty to execute a Will in favour of her grandson (9 th respondent) over the above property and petitioners cannot raise any objection in the matter. Soon after the execution of the impugned Will, the 9 th respondent pulled down his old structure and took building permission from respondent No.7 on date 25.09.2018, intended to raise a new structure in the area purchased by his grandfather in an auction conducted by the District Board. Soon after the execution of the impugned Will, the 9 th respondent pulled down his old structure and took building permission from respondent No.7 on date 25.09.2018, intended to raise a new structure in the area purchased by his grandfather in an auction conducted by the District Board. I also submit that the petitioners have not raised any objection or not raised any little finger of dissent over the houses constructed by the other purchasers. The petitioner suppressed all the said facts and filed this petition before this Hon'ble High Court at a time when the 9 th respondent started construction on unsustainable grounds. The other contentions raised by the petitioner in these paras are all baseless and untenable and aimed at distorting the attention of this Hon'ble High Court. - 5. I respectfully submit that the contention of the petitioners that the disputed property is Government land and public property is far from true and baseless. The Gram Panchayat has no jurisdiction over the same. It is a purchased land, purchased in an open auction conducted by the District Board. The grandfather of the 9 th respondent and father of the 10 and 11 respodnents had purchased the same for a consideration of Rs.3,600/- in the year 1959. There is no illegality or impropriety in the matter and as such the action of the respondents in taking up construction over the disputed site cannot be construed as illegal and impermissible and the Government cannot be expected to keep them in fetters and to restrain them.” 5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for 7 th respondent submitted written instructions dated 05.08.2025 furnished by 7 th respondent wherein it is stated as under: “It is humbly submitted that no construction has been till date in the land in Sy.No.168/2A of Chinthaparthi Village. The land is vacant and no construction has been raised by the Respondent Nos.9 to 11. I am enclosing photographs taken today i.e., 05.08.2025 at 09.59 AM for kind consideration of this Hon'ble Court.” 6. The land is vacant and no construction has been raised by the Respondent Nos.9 to 11. I am enclosing photographs taken today i.e., 05.08.2025 at 09.59 AM for kind consideration of this Hon'ble Court.” 6. Considering the submissions made by counsel representing all parties and perusal of record placed before this Court as well as written instructions of the 7 th respondent, it is an admitted fact that the grand-father of the 9 th respondent and father of unofficial respondent Nos.10 and 11 acquired an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in a public auction conducted by the District Board through a registered sale deed No.2259/1959, dated 07.07.1959 and the same was also admitted by the petitioners at Para-2 of his affidavit and got constructed a house thereon, but due to dilapidated condition respondent Nos.9 to 11 are intended to make a new construction and submitted building application for construction and initiated steps for construction of the same. Whereas, upon perusal of the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, it is clearly and categorically stated that the subject land, where the construction is being carried out by the unofficial respondents, is private land and does not fall under the classification of "Rasta" or "Public Road." It is further reiterated that the grand-father and father of the unofficial respondent Nos.9 to 11 acquired the subject land in the year 1959 itself and later he executed a Will in favour of the unofficial respondents. As such they are entitled to make further construction as per the sanction plan approved by the 7 th respondent – Gram Panchayat. - 7. As contended by learned counsel for unofficial respondents the unofficial respondents granted due permission for construction on 25.09.2018 by the 7 th respondent – Gram Panchayat, as such the unofficial respondents are entitled to make further construction as per the sanctioned plan issued by the 7 th respondent. - 8. In view of fact the unofficial respondents are granted permission and even as admitted by the petitioners, the subject land was acquired by the unofficial respondents through a sale deed in the year 1959 itself. The allegation of the petitioners that the respondents are proceeding, without there being any permission by occupying the road of the Gram Panchayat is far from facts as stated above. 9. The allegation of the petitioners that the respondents are proceeding, without there being any permission by occupying the road of the Gram Panchayat is far from facts as stated above. 9. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent Nos.9 to 11 are proceeding with the construction without there being any valid permission and by encroaching road margin is not proved by way of any specific evidence but he relied upon the action taken report of the Mandal Engineering Officer, dated 17.11.2018 to whom the same was submitted not indicated anywhere and the name mentioned in the report is K. Chinnarami Reddy, who is not made as a party respondent herein. Therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that the unofficial respondents are making construction by occupying the road is contrary to the facts as stated by the respondents in their counters as extracted above. - 10. The allegations made by the petitioners are only invented and far from the truth. Even today there is no construction at all still the entire land is vacant land. 11. As submitted by learned Standing Counsel for 7 th respondent – Gram Panchayat, as of now there is no construction at the subject land as alleged by the petitioners and the subject land is still vacant as it is. 12. In view of the facts as stated above, the claim of the petitioners that the respondents are proceedings without there being any permission by occupying public road is contrary to the facts and intends to stall the construction of the unofficial respondents. However, the permission which was granted by the 7 th respondent on 25.09.2018 is not valid to proceed the construction as of now. As per Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and building) Rules 2002, any permission granted by the Gram Panchayat is valid for a period of one year only, if the respondents are intend to make any construction they should obtain permission afresh or they should get renewal to the permission which was already granted on 25.09.2018. - 13. In view of foregoing discussion, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.