R. P. KOUSALYA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. P. Padmavathi, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, Sri B. Ramesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Gudapati Lakshminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.3.

(2.) Prayer sought in this Writ Petition is as under:

(3.) On 24/4/2026, the Commissioner had rendered Written Instructions to the effect that the encroachment by the encroachers on the 33 feet wide layout road (in L.P.No.3/83) had reduced the effective road width to approximately 10 to 15 feet only and that the said reduction is causing significant hurdles for the movement of vehicles and is restricting access to the plot belonging to the Writ Petitioner bearing No.68C. When time was granted to the Respondents on 27/4/2026, Sri Gudapati Lakshminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.3, has submitted the Proceedings issued by the Commissioner to the Tahsildar dtd. 27/4/2026, requesting the Tahsildar to explore the possibility of allotting alternate sites to the inhabitants. In any case, the law is not in support of the stand taken by the Commissioner that the alternate sites should be allotted to the encroachers, inasmuch as such allotments would embolden prospective encroachers and be detrimental to the public interest. The view of this Court is fortified by the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Vs. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan : (1997) 11 SCC 121. Relevant portion of the Judgment is usefully extracted hereunder: