This order disposes of Writ Petition No.18463 of 2019 by directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property except in accordance with law, following due process.
Respondents directed not to dispossess petitioners from the subject property except in accordance with law.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
WRIT PETITION No.18463 OF 2019
ORDER:
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in similar circumstances, this Court passed an order on 28.11.2019 in W.P. No.19077 of 2019, directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners therein without following due process of law and the present Writ Petition also stands on the same footing. It is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader and he submits that this Writ Petition also can be disposed of in terms thereof.
Having regard to the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents herein not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property except in accordance with law. It is open for the respondent-authorities to follow due process of law and take appropriate steps. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall
stand closed.
___________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J
Date: 02.12.2019 siva
2
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
WRIT PETITION No.18463 of 2019
Date: 02.12.2019
siva
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be disposed of in light of a similar order passed in W.P. No.19077 of 2019 regarding possession of the subject property.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. No.19077 of 2019Referred¶4
petitioners
respondents
A.V.SESHA SAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
