Disposed
Peeta Chinna Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh HCWP/45151/2018
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE No:…
What the court decided
AI extract
ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE No:…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No: W.P.No.45151 of 2018
PROCEEDING SHEET
| SL. **NO. ** |
DATE | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11.10.2022 | DVSS, J | ||
| I.A.No.1 of 2022 This is an application filed for impleading a number of petitioners i.e petitioners 5 to 64. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that in the writ affidavit it is mentioned that the writ petitioners and others have lost their houses. Therefore, she seeks to justify filing the implead application on the ground that the foundation is laid in the pleading. It is also submitted that all the proposed parties are eligible for allotment of houses but their right is denied. Therefore, the counsel pleads that the amendment should be allowed. Learned Government Pleader vehemently opposes the application. He points out that the petitioners will not be eligible for allotment of houses merely because they are residents of Alamanda village. According to him, it must be proved that they had in fact lost their houses in the Hud Hud cyclone for relief under the present writ petition. He also submits that the presence of these petitioners is not necessary for adjudication of the issues raised in main writ petition. He submits that due to the orders of the Court the constructed houses have deteriorated in value. As |
| SL. NO. |
DATE | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| per him the present petition is filed to delay the hearing only. This Court after examining the contentions of the parties notices that the petitioners in the implead petition were not able to state and are proved that they are people whose houses were in existence at the time of Hud Hud cyclone and or that their houses were actually destroyed in the cyclone. In addition, the writ petition is filed by the four petitioners questioning the action of the State in issuing the impugned endorsement dated 19.01.2018. The presence of these parties is therefore not necessary for adjudication of the said dispute. Even in the absence of the proposed petitioners, the writ petition can be heard and decided. |
|||
| This Court holds that the implead petitioners are neither necessary nor proper parties. This application is therefore dismissed. |
|||
| ____________ DVSS,J W.P.No.45151 of 2018 Writ petition is dismissed. (vide separate order) |
|||
| ____________ DVSS,J KLP |
Petitioners 5 to 64
DVSS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court