Disposed

S.Nagarajaiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Nov 2021WP/10786/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that authorities cannot demolish properties for flood protection or road construction without prior notices. The court directed authorities to issue notices, provide an opportunity to explain, conduct surveys in the petitioners' presence, and refrain from coercive steps until final action is taken, citing Article 300A.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent authorities to issue notices, afford opportunity for explanation, hold survey in petitioners' presence, and restrain from any coercive action until further orders.

S.Nagarajaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.10786 OF 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard Sri C.Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.Jagannadha Rao, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2-Municipal Corporation, and Smt. S.Siva Kumari, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation, appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4, apart from perusing the material available on record.

¶5

Though this matter appears under the caption ‘For Admission’, in view of the availability of pleadings of respondent Nos.3 and 4 also, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners, so also the learned advocates appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition at this stage.

¶6

Action of the respondent-authorities in proposing to demolish the houses bearing D.Nos.4/351 of petitioner No.1, 4/352 and 4/352 of petitioner No.2, 4/352-1 of petitioner No.3, 4/352-4 of petitioner No.4, 4/352-3 of petitioner No.5, 4/342-1 of petitioner No.6 and 4/342 of petitioner No.7, situated at Nagarajupeta within Kadapa Municipal Corporation limits, Kadapa Town, Kadapa District, is under challenge in the present Writ Petition. In the pleadings filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is indicated that the petitioners herein are the absolute owners and possessors of

¶7

¶8

the subject properties. The essence of the case of the petitioners is that in the name of construction of protection wall for Buggavanka in Kadapa, the respondent-Irrigation Authorities are attempting to disturb the petitioners from their private properties. It is also the specific case of the petitioners that the respondent-Irrigation Authorities are resorting to such action without issuing any notices and without adhering to due process of law. This Court on 27.05.2021, while issuing notices to the respondents before admission, directed the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners and not to demolish the structures without following due process of law. By way of I.A. No.2 of 2021, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are praying this Court to vacate the said order, however, as observed supra, with the consent of all the learned advocates, this Court is taking up the matter to dispose of the Writ Petition finally.

¶9

A counter affidavit, deposed by the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Kadapa Division, Kadapa Districtrespondent No.3 herein, has been filed. Paragraph No.5 of the said counter affidavit reads as under:

¶10

"Further it is respectfully submitted that, the Petitioners Properties located on the Right Bank of Buggavanka and located Nagarajupet within Kadapa Municipal Corporation Limits. Revenue Department has conducted survey to identify the Buggavanka boundary on either side of Buggavanka so as to pave to construct the Flood Protection wall and formation of B.T. Road to mitigate panic conditions from floods and traffic menace in Kadapa town. If the petitioners

¶11

¶12

property is within the boundary of Buggavanka and it means it is the encroachments and will be cleared by the Revenue Department by issuing suitable time to vacate the house duly allotting the house sites as per the eligibility. If the petitioners property is outside the boundary of Buggavanka and located in Patta lands, Revenue Department will conduct survey for Acquisition of Land if needed for Road and conduct detailed survey before publication of Draft Notification and Draft Declaration as per the L.A.Act 2013. The Revenue Department is taking steps to remove the identified encroachments along Buggavanka by giving sufficient time to the encroachers in order to pave easy construction of Flood Protection wall and to save the Kadapa town during floods. If the petitioners property requires either construction flood protection wall or formation of B.T. road, the said land/structures will be acquired by the Land Acquisition Authorities duly following due process of law by invoking LA Act 2013 by issuing notices to the petitioners well in advance by paying compensation as per rules in force."

¶13

The counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3 is absolutely silent as to whether any notices have been issued to the petitioners herein with regard to the subject properties. It is a settled and well-established principle of law as enshrined under Article 300A of the Constitution of India that no citizen of this country shall be deprived of his/her property except in accordance with the procedure established by law. The averment, as regards the non-issuance of notices to the petitioners, is not disputed in the entire counter affidavit filed by respondent No3. A reading of

¶14

¶15

paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit of respondent No.3 is also silent as to whether the survey undertaken by the Revenue Department was in the presence of the petitioners.

¶16

Since it is the categoric case of the petitioners herein that they are in occupation of their respective private properties and supported by valid documents, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the respondentauthorities to issue notices to the petitioners herein for the proposed action, if any, and to afford opportunity to the petitioners to submit their explanations with their supporting documents and for passing appropriate orders/taking appropriate action thereafter. It is also made clear that in the event of there being any disputes as regards the identity of the property and nature of property, if it is requested by the petitioners herein to hold survey, the same be considered and appropriate steps be taken for holding such survey in the presence of the present writ petitioners. It is also made clear that till such action is taken, no coercive steps against the properties of the petitioners shall be taken.

¶17

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.

¶18

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶19

___________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

¶20

Date: 05.11.2021 siva

¶21

¶22

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.10786 OF 2021

¶24

Date: 05.11.2021

¶25

siva

S.Nagarajaiah v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Nagarajaiah 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C Abdul Rawoof Vs S Purushotham Reddy

Lagudu Ramaswamy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Tarigopula Sanjeeva Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B.Chenamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kolla Venkata Naga Prasad. Vs State of Andhra Pradesh.

Salapu Ramu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh