THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P. No.10330 of 2009 21-08-2009 BETWEEN; V.Subba Rami Reddy and two others. ...Petitioners vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By District Collector Nellore and six others. ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.10330 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: (Per GR,J) That the respondents 6 and 7 have commenced constructions in land of an extent of Ac.8.00 cents in Sy.Nos.665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 672, 673, 674 and 723 abutting the GNT road within the limits of the 5th respondent-Potupalem Gram panchayat without obtaining lay out and thereby denying access to the petitioners, is the grievance in this writ petition wherein interdiction of the constructions by respondents 6 and 7 is sought till they obtain lay out approval. The 5th respondent-Gram Panchayat through its secretary has filed a counter-affidavit. Apart from impeaching the locus of the petitioners to maintain the writ petition, it is asserted that no constructions have been undertaken except in an extent covered by Sy.Nos.665, 723 and that the constructions in these survey numbers are made after obtaining necessary permission from the concerned authority by leaving adequate space for roads and other public utilities. It is further stated that the grandson of the 6th respondent, one Saravan Kumar had obtained the land from the 6th respondent under a registered gift deed; approached the Gram Panchayat for obtaining necessary permission for construction of a building after obtaining conversion of land from agricultural to commercial category under the provisions of the Act; and the Gram Panchayat by proceedings dated 07-03-2009 accorded permission for construction. The learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat further states that in terms of Rule 16(c) of the A.P. Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building) Rules,2002 ( for short “the 2002 Rules”), while no site or parcel of land may be used for building activity unless it is approved as a building plot or forms part of an approved lay out, this regime does not apply inter alia to industrial and non-residential buildings abutting highways or main roads. The constructions of the respondents 6 and 7 in Sy.Nos.724 are non residential in character. It is the case of the respondents 6 and 7 also that these constructions are non residential in character. It is also admitted that these constructions are abutting GNT road, which is a highway or a main road. In the circumstances and on facts, the constructions of the respondents 6 and 7 fall within the ambit of Rule.16(c) of the 2002 Rules and therefore do not require an approved lay out as a condition precedent for constructions. Since the 5th respondent’s counter-affidavit states that the constructions are being made after conversion of the land from agricultural to commercial under the appropriate legislation and after obtaining approval from the Gram Panchayat, no transgression of any legal regime is apparent or established. It is the case of the 5th respondent as averred in the counter-affidavit that an access is also provided to the petitioners elsewhere for approaching their lands. In the circumstances no factual grievance of the petitioners is apparent. The writ petition is therefore dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J __________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 21st AUGUST, 2009. TSNR