logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 180 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Writ Petition No. 27736 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
Parties : P. Mahabaleswara Herle & Others Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its principal Secretary to the Government, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, Amaravati & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: Garsikuti Harsha Vardhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Potham Vengala Reddy, SC.
Date of Judgment : 06-02-2026
Head Note :-
Subject
Judgment :-

Oral Order:

1. Heard Sri P. Karthik Kiran, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri G. Harsha Vardhan, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, Sri P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporations for Rayalaseema Region and Sri S. Vijaya Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporations.

2. Sri P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporations for Rayalaseema Region has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Commissioner, Chittoor Municipal Corporation. Copy of the Written Instruction is also furnished to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner. This Written Instruction is taken on record.

3. Relevant portion of the Written Instruction is usefully extracted hereunder:

                  “The Chittoor Municipal Corporation is committed to following the due process of law in all development-related activities. In the case of required land acquisition, due procedures under applicable laws, including G.O.Ms.No.122 MA & UD dated 24.08.2022, and relevant provisions of the A.P Municipal Corporation Act, will be strictly adhered to.

                  However if the municipal corporation initiates any land acquisition for the implementation of Road Development, we will issue notices and take consent letters from the aggrieved parties duly following the rules as per Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authority Act, 2016.”

4. The above extract would indicate clearly that the Municipal Corporation would follow the due process of law whenever it undertakes the exercise for road widening.

5. Having noted the same, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition at the admission stage and without going into merits directing the Respondents to follow the due process of law including the initiation of proceeding for acquiring the land belonging to the private parties whenever the Municipal Corporation seeks for widening the road.

6. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
 
  CDJLawJournal