Disposed

Yeturu Venkateswara Reddy S/o Dasaratharami Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Dec 2022WP/35580/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ declaring retrospective treatment of land as government land illegal and demanded registration of sale deed; court found cause survived as land deleted from prohibited list and properties already registered, hence petition closed.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed as properties deleted from prohibited list and already registered; no order as to costs.

Yeturu Venkateswara Reddy S/o Dasaratharami Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary — Andhra Pradesh HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.35580 of 2015

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶5

“to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in treating the land covered by S.No.926 an extent of Ac.3-86 cents, S.No.1352 an extent of Ac.1-66 cents and S.No.1359 an extent of Ac.7-51 cents of Utukuru village, Vidavaluru mandal, SPSR Nellore District as Government land and refusing to register the sale deed presented in respect of the above land as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to delete the land covered by S.No.926 an extent of Ac.3-86 cents, S.No.1352 an extent of Ac.1-66 cents and S.No.1359 an extent of Ac.7-51 cents of Utukuru village, Vidavaluru mandal, SPSR Nellore District from the list of prohibited property and treat the above land as private patta land and receive and register the sale deed pertaining to S.Nos.926 an extent of Ac.386 cents, S.No.1352 an extent of Ac.l-66 cents and S.No. 1359 an extent of Ac.7-51 cents of Utukuru village, Vidavaluru mandal, SPSR Nellore District and to pass such other orders”.

¶6

It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after filing of this Writ Petition, the subject properties are deleted from the prohibited list and also the said properties were registered and the cause in this Writ Petition is survived and nothing survives for further adjudication.

¶7

¶8

Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶9

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

¶10

_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶11

Date : 07.12.2022 KGR

¶12

¶13

218

¶14

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.35580 of 2015

¶16

Date : 07.12.2022

¶17

KGR

Yeturu Venkateswara Reddy S/o Dasaratharami Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yeturu Venkateswara Reddy S/o Dasaratharami Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bevara Peda Sanyasi S/o Appala Swamy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.Gudaguntla Kanthamma Vs TheTahsildar

Gullala Atchutam, s/o. late Narayana Swamy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mallabatula Pulla Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by Its Principal

Sarukolla Yerikalamma, Kadapa Dist Vs Prl Secy, Revenue Dept., Hyd and 3 Ot

A.R.Sarabdeen Vs State of Andhra Pradesh