Disposed

Moraboina Malyadri, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Jul 2020WP/10721/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge Writ Court reassessed the proposed demolition of a kirana shop on Grama Kantam land on the basis of a statutory show cause notice directing the authority to follow due process before action. The court remitted the matter for proper procedure and restrained coercive measures during pendency.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to submit explanation within 15 days; a show cause notice issued; respondents directed to act by due process and refrain from coercive steps pendente lite.

Moraboina Malyadri, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.10721 of 2020

¶3

ORDER:-

¶4

The present writ petition is filed questioning the proposed action of the respondents in trying to demolish the kirana shop of the petitioner in Grama Kantam land situated in Sy.No.769/2 near water tank of Thimmapalem Village, Ponnaluru Mandal, Prakasam District.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri V.Vinod K Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶6

The contention of the petitioner is that he has occupied Ac.0.01 cent of Grama kantam land and constructed a small kirana shop and he has been in possession of the same for the last several years. He is running the kirana shop since long back and has been paying taxes to respondent No.3 and nobody disturbed his possession till today. He has also obtained electricity connection to his shop bearing service connection No.HSC 4511321998928 and he has been paying electricity consumption charges to the department. While so, respondent No.3, without issuing any notice and following the procedure, was trying to demolish the kirana shop. Under those circumstances, he filed the present writ petition on 24.6.2020. It is his further contention that after filing the writ petition, respondent No.3 issued a notice on 29.6.2020 asking the petitioner to vacate the premises within three days otherwise, they will demolish the kirana shop.

¶7

¶8

Be that as it may, the petitioner occupied Ac.0.01 cent of land belonging to the Grama kantam and he has been running the kirana shop. Admittedly, the petitioner is in physical possession and enjoyment of the said property for the last so many years. So far as the notice dated 29.6.2020 is concerned, it can be treated as a show cause notice for which the petitioner is directed to submit his explanation within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such explanation, the respondents are directed to take appropriate action by following the due process of law.

¶9

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Till such exercise is completed, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶11

_____________________________ JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

Date : 14.7.2020 AMD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.10721 of 2020

¶17

Date : 14.7.2020

¶18

AMD

Moraboina Malyadri, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moraboina Malyadri, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D Ramanamma Vs the State of Ap

Mopuram Krishna Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Y. Nagaraja Naidu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

The Nadigadda Fishermen Cooperative Society, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalla Venkata Ramana Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Konda Udaya Balaji Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh