Disposed

V. Rajani Kumari, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Nov 2022WP/4477/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing respondent authorities not to interfere with petitioners' possession of specified land except by following due process of law, basing the order on the 4th respondent's statement.

What did the court decide?

Direction not to interfere with petitioners' peaceful possession of specified land except by following due process of law.

V. Rajani Kumari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.4477 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 any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the Respondents in interfering with petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property without any notice or due process of law in respect of the land to an extent of admeasuring Ac.3-74 cents in Survey No.473/3 of Kadavakuduru village, Chinaganjam Mandal, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass such other orders”.

¶6

On 25.02.2015, when the writ petition came up for

¶7

admission, this Court passed the following interim order:-

¶8

“…..In the circumstances, pending disposal of the writ petition, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in question in any manner….”.

¶9

The 4^th respondent filed his counter stating that the

¶10

respondents are not going to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in the above mentioned land and there is no proposal to allot this land on lease for sand excavation.

¶11

¶12

Recording the said statement made by the 4^th respondentTahsildar in his counter, instead of going into the merits of the case, it is suffice to issue a direction to the respondent authorities not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners from the land to an extent of admeasuring Ac.3-74 cents in Survey No.473/3 of Kadavakuduru village, Chinaganjam Mandal, Prakasam District, except by following due process of law.

¶13

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶14

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶15

_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶16

Date : 08.11.2022 ARR

¶17

¶18

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.4477 of 2015

¶20

Date : 08.11.2022

¶21

ARR

V. Rajani Kumari, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Rajani Kumari, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary

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

Kethavath Lakshmi Bai, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.Sirapanasetti Maha Lakshmi,and 3 Vs Tahsildar,Vps Dist,and 2

Pothani Lakshmaiah, S/o. P.Ramaiah, Vs The Tahsildar

Eerakkagari Chinnababu S/o E. Bavaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its

Smt.Atakuru Saradamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.G. Eeranna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary