Dismissed

B.Shanthabai v. The District Collector

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Feb 2022WP/3636/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The writ petition challenging the illegal issuance of a pattadar pass book was heard. The court noted the respondents had not disposed of the petitioner's representation. Accordingly, the petitioner was directed to make a fresh representation, and the authority was directed to dispose of it appropriately and communicate the order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to make a fresh representation to the 3rd respondent, who shall pass appropriate orders and communicate to the petitioner.

B.Shanthabai Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI WRIT PETITION No.3636 of 2010

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not considering the representation submitted by the petitioner for cancellation of DKT Patta and pattadar pass book issued in favour of the 4^th respondent with regard to patta land covered by Sy.No.234/2 admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.22 cents and Sy.No.52/2 admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.04 cents, situated at Gundlapalem, Nellore Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

The case of the petitioner is that one Smt. D.Saraswathi Bai and Sri Sundaralal have purchased the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1-17 cents in Sy.No.549/1(old) and Sy.No.236/4 (New) and an extent of Ac.1.51 cents in Sy.No.148/2 (old) and Sy.No.51/3 (new), situated at Gundlapalem, Nellore District, in the Court auction held on 30.06.1936 and Sale Certificate No. MCP No.57/32 was issued. After their death, the petitioner succeeded to the above land. The 4^th respondent was cultivating the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.1-17 cents in Sy.No.236/4 on lease basis. The 3^rd respondent issued pattadar pass book in the name of the 4^th respondent for an extent of Ac.0.22 cents from out of Ac.1-17 cents in Sy.No.236/2 and Ac.0.04 cents from out of Ac.1-51 cents in Sy.No.51/3 and assigned subdivision Nos.234/2 and 52/2. After knowing the same, the

¶6

¶7

petitioner made a representation to Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to cancel the pattadar pass book issued in favour of the 4^th respondent in respect of the above extent. But, they did not take any action so far. The 4^th respondent has no title or right in respect of the land covered by Sy.No.234/2 and 52/2. The land covered by said two survey numbers is part of Sy.Nos.236/4 and 51/3 and hence, issuing pattadar pass book and title deed in favour of the 4^th respondent is illegal and arbitrary. As no action has been taken, one more representation was made on 24.12.2009 to Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Still there is no response from the respondents. Hence, the Writ Petition.

¶8

When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 18.02.2010, an interim direction was issued directing the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 24.12.2009.

¶9

Notice was served on the unofficial respondent. Sri Chilakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel, filed Vakalath on behalf of 4^th respondent.

¶10

When the matter came up for hearing on 21.12.2021, 06.01.2022 and 11.02.2022, learned Government Pleader was directed to get latest instructions in this matter as to whether the representation made by the petitioner was disposed of pursuant to the interim direction. But, however, he could not get instructions in this matter. He passed on the instructions of the Tahsildar, Nellore Rural, which are dated 27.11.2019.

¶11

¶12

In the said instructions, nothing is stated as to disposal of the representation made by the petitioner. As no acknowledgement is filed along with Writ Petition, it is not known as to whether the said representation is received or not. In the written instructions, it is clearly stated that pattadar pass book was issued to the unofficial respondent. The contentions raised by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are not at all answered in the written instructions issued by the Tahsildar, Nellore Rural, dated 27.11.2019. No counter affidavit is filed.

¶13

In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation to the 3^rd respondent and on such representation being filed, the 3^rd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶14

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶15

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶16

_________________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

¶17

Date: 16.02.2022 Ks

¶18

¶19

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶20

WRIT PETITION No.3636 of 2010

¶21

Date: 16.02.2022

¶22

B.Shanthabai v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Shanthabai v. The District Collector

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

Kovvuri Shiva Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Koppulu Karthikesawa Kumar Vs the State of Ap.

N Venkata Ramana Reddy Vs State of Ap

Konapalli Ramamohana Rao, Visakhapatnam District Vs Prl. Secretary, Civil Supplies Dept., Hyderabad and 2 Others

D.Vamsikrishna Reddy Vs the Govt of Ap., Civil Supplies Dept., and 7 Others

P. Bhavani, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh