Disposed

Limmala Prasada Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Aug 2020WP/14016/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Petition returned through video conferencing. The Chief Justice directed the respondent authorities to consider the petitioners' representation dated 29.07.2020 regarding house site pattas under the Navaratnalu scheme and decide the same in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider the petitioners' representation dated 29.07.2020 regarding house site pattas and decide it in accordance with law.

Limmala Prasada Rao Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

HCJ W.P.No.14016/2020

¶3

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

¶4

CHIEF JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.14016 of 2020

¶6

(Taken up through video conferencing)

¶7

Limmala Prasada Rao, S/o late Purandar, Aged about 54 years, R/o Solikiri, Baleru Panchayat, Bhamini Mandal, Srikakulam District and 12 others.

¶8

.. Petitioners.

¶9

Versus 1. State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, and three others.

¶10

..Respondents. Counsel for Petitioners : Sri P. Rajkumar Counsel for respondents : GP for Revenue

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

Dt: 14.08.2020

¶13

Sri P. Rajkumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶14

Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.

¶15

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief:

¶16

“to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the Respondents in trying to dispossess the Petitioners from their respective House Site Plots to an extent of Ac.0.03 each in Sy.Nos.94/1, 94/2, 94/3, 94/4, 94/5, 94/6, 94/10 and 94/14 of Solikiri Village, Baleru Gram Panchayat limits, Bhamini Mandal, Srikakulam District to provide house sites to the beneficiaries under NAVARATNALU

¶17

¶18

HCJ W.P.No.14016/2020

¶19

PEDALANDARIKI ILLU Scheme without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, colourable exercise of the power, as also contrary to Articles 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to dispossess the Petitioners from their respective House Site Plots to an extent of Ac.0.03 each in Sy Nos.94/1, 94/2, 94/3, 94/4, 94/5, 94/6, 94/10 and 94/14 of Solikiri Village, Baleru Gram Panchayat limits, Bhamini Mandal, Srikakulam District, except under due process of law and pass such other order or further order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶20

It is the grievance of the petitioners that they have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject house site plots, and the respondent-authorities are trying to take possession of the subject plots for the purpose of allotment of house site pattas under the scheme ‘Navaratnalu – Pedalandariki Illu’, without issuing any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners submitted a representation dated 29.7.2020 to respondents No.2 to 4 making a request to provide house site pattas under the above scheme by considering their long standing possession over the subject plots, but the same has not been considered so far.

¶22

In the facts of the case, it is suffice to observe that respondents 2 to 4 shall consider the representation dated

¶23

¶24

HCJ W.P.No.14016/2020

¶25

29.07.2020 submitted by the petitioners and decide the same, in accordance with law.

¶26

With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

¶27

J.K. MAHESHWARI, CJ

¶28

Nn.

¶29

¶30

HCJ W.P.No.14016/2020

¶31

THE CHIEF JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI

¶32

W.P.No.14016 OF 2020

¶33

Dt: 14.08.2020

¶34

Limmala Prasada Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Limmala Prasada Rao v. 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

S.V.S. Babujee, Anantapur Dt. and Anr. Vs State of a.P., Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

Ch. Mallikarjuna Rao, Vijayawada Vs Inspector of Police, Cid, Visakhapatnam City

Gubbala Yesu Venkata Gopala Krishna, W.G.Dist. Vs P.P., Hyd and Ano

S.Fakruddin and 5 Others Vs the State of a.P.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Nettikoppula Ashok Vs The State

L.Sudarshan Vs the State of a.P., and Another