Disposed

B.Subba Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Jan 2020WP/351/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by landowners facing attempted dispossession. Court disposed of the petition at admission stage, directing the respondent to consider pending objections, afford a personal hearing, and not dispossess petitioners until the exercise is completed.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to consider objections, afford personal hearing, and not dispossess petitioners until proceedings complete.

B.Subba Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO WRIT PETITION No.351 OF 2020

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Potturi, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing respondent Nos.1 to 4 and with their consent, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

¶4

2. It is the case of the petitioners that in R.S.No.247 of Kandulavaripalem Village, Sattenapalli Mandal, Guntur District the petitioners have been in possession of different parcels of land either by virtue of registered sale deeds or by way of inheritance. It is also their case that some of the petitioners were granted Pattadar Pass Books and their names were recorded in revenue records. While so, their grievance is that respondent No.2 issued a general notice stating that the said land to an extent of Ac.3.24 cents in Survey No.247 will be assigned to landless poor and called for objections and the petitioners have submitted their representations/objections dated 27.12.2019 and also the individual representations dated 02.01.2020 and the same are pending consideration. However, in the meanwhile, the respondents are trying to dispossess them from their respective lands.

¶5

3. As the petitioners have already submitted their collective and individual objections/representation to the respondent No.2, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to consider those

¶6

¶7

representations/objection of the petitioners and also afford an opportunity of personal hearing to them and pass the orders in accordance with law expeditiously. Till such exercise is completed, the respondents shall not dispossess the petitioners from their respective possession of the petition mentioned lands.

¶8

4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶9

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall

¶10

stand closed.

¶11

_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO , J 08.01.2020

¶12

Note: Issue C.C by 10.01.2020 B/o. MS

¶13

¶14

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.351 OF 2020

¶16

Date.08.01.2020

¶17

B.Subba Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Subba Reddy 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

Korukonda Venkata Satagopa Rarnanuja Bhattar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Aalavala . Venkateswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Boya Mahendra Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Vasireddy Venkateswara Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

T Koteswaramma Vs The State of A.P

Tadi Venkat Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh