Allowed

Koripella Subba Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Jan 2021WP/36/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed a writ petition challenging the inclusion of specific land plots in a prohibited list under G.O.Ms.No.193. Relying on a prior judgment in WP.No.46139 of 2018 covering similar circumstances involving adjoining land owners, the court set aside the impugned order. No order as to costs was made.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the inclusion of petitioners' land (plots 130, 131, 148, 149, 134, 133, 200) in the list at serial No.1415 of the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.193 dated 05.05.2016.

Koripella Subba Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

¶2

Writ Petition No.36 of 2021

¶3

ORDER

¶4

Questioning the action of the 1^st respondent in including the petitioner’s land, a total extent of 1400 Sq.yards, plot Nos.130, 131, 148 and 149 of 1^st petitioner, an extent of 350 sq.yards, plot Nos.134 of 2^nd petitioner, an extent of 350 sq.yards, plot No.133 of 3^rd petitioner and an extent of 270 sq.yards, plot No.200 of 4^th petitioner situated in Sy.No.15/1 of Duvvada Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as shown in the list at serial No.1415 of the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.193, Revenue (Assn.1) Department, dated 05.05.2016, illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Registration and Stamps appearing for the respondents.

¶6

The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of house plots in Sy.No.15/1 of Duvvada village and the 1^st petitioner purchased the plot an extent of Ac.1.00 cents under a registered sale deed, dated 06.04.1984 vide document No.1357 of 1984, 2^nd petitioner purchased the plot an extent of 350 Sq.yards under a registered sale deed, dated 27.10.1998 vide document No.2728 of 1998, 3^rd petitioner purchased the plot an extent of 350 Sq.yards under a registered sale deed, dated 27.10.1998 vide document No.2727 of 1998 and 4^th petitioner purchased the plot an extent of 270 Sq.yards under a registered sale deed, dated 21.06.1989 vide document No.1365 of 1989 from Sekara mantri Ramachandrayya. In the Village Settlement Register, the land situated in Sy.No.15/1 of Duvvada village is shown as

¶7

¶8

patta land vide patta No.479 belonging to Sekhara Mantri Ramachandrayya, Sanaboyina Chinnayya, Mamidi Guruvulu, Galla Chellayya and Naravamsini Kondayya. Since the year 1939 several documents were registered in relation to different extents of land situated in Sy.No.15 of Duvvada village. However, the 1^st respondent issued the impugned G.O.Ms.No.193, dated 05.05.2016, including the land in Sy.No.15 and its sub divisions in the annexure, under Section 22A(1)(e) of the Registration Act. The land of the petitioner, which is part of the land situated in Sy.No.15/1, is shown at serial No.1415 of the annexure. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed.

¶9

At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in similar facts and circumstances, when the adjoining land owners in Sy.No.15/2 and 15/3 filed W.P.No.46139 of 2018, the combined High Court of AP allowed the said writ petition setting aside the inclusion of petitioners land therein, in the prohibited list of properties, in the annexure to G.O.Ms.No.193, dated 05.06.2016. Aggrieved by the said orders, the State preferred W.A.No.273 of 2020 and this Court by judgment dated 24.11.2020 dismissed the writ appeal. Therefore, the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the orders of combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 19.12.2018 in WP.No.46139 of 2018.

¶10

The same is not disputed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader. However, he would submit that the writ appeal was not dismissed on merits but as the writ appeal was preferred with a delay of 581 days, this Court having found that no sufficient reason has been shown for filing the appeal belatedly, dismissed the application filed for condonation of delay and consequently dismissed the writ appeal.

¶11

¶12

A perusal of the order, dated 19.12.2018 in WP.No.46139 of 2018 reflects that this Court, in view of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners therein that in similar circumstances this Court allowed WP.No.42044 of 2018 by order dated 23.11.2018, which is not disputed by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, allowed the said writ petition, for the reasons alike in the order, dated 23.11.2018 in WP.No.42044 of 2018.

¶13

Following the orders dated 19.12.2018 in WP.No.46139 of 2018 and for the reasons alike as were mentioned in the order dated 23.11.2018 in WP.No.42044 of 2018, this Writ Petition is also allowed setting aside the inclusion of petitioners’ land, an extent of 1400 Sq.yards, 350 sq.yards, 350 sq.yards and 270 sq.yards situated in Sy.No.15/1 of Duvvada Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District in the list at serial No.1415 of the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.193, Revenue (Assn.1) Department, dated 05.05.2016.

¶14

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶16

______________ M.GANGA RAO, J

¶17

06.01.2021 KLPD

¶18

¶19

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO

¶20

WRIT PETITON NO.36 of 2021

¶21

Date: 06-01-2021

¶22

KLPD

Koripella Subba Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koripella Subba Rao, 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

Bachu Venkata Ramesh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Yelala Narasimha Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri.Gandla Siddappa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh and 5 others

E S Sarojini Devi Vs the State of Ap

Mogarala Rajababu Vs State of Ap

Guvvappagari Anjinappa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh