Disposed

Vinakota Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Apr 2023WP/10256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged respondent authorities marking their private land for road widening without notice, citing violation of natural justice. The court directed a survey to identify encroachment, ordered notice for future surveys, and prohibited interference until completion.

What did the court decide?

Directed survey to identify encroachments with notice to petitioners; prohibited respondents from interfering with possession for 8 weeks.

Vinakota Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.10256 OF 2023

¶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 an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in marking in the middle o petitioners property situated in Survey No.119 and D.No.3-224 of Padugupadu Village, Kovur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District to an extent of Ac.0.05 cents for widening the road without paying compensation and without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principle of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the extent of land of the petitioner utilized for widening the road and further direct the respondents not to demolish and interfere in any manner with the above said land and pass such other or further orders…”

¶6

The petitioners are the absolute owners and

¶7

possessors of an extent of Ac.0.05 cents in Sy. No.119 and D.No.3-224 of Padugupadu Village, Kovur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District having purchased the said land through a registered sale deed dated 19.02.2015. Thereafter, the petitioners have raised constructions in the said building after duly obtaining

¶8

necessary building approvals from the competent authority i.e. 3^rd respondent and leased out the said premises for various petty units.

¶9

While the matter being so, the respondent authorities on 17.04.2023 came to the petitioners’ property and marked in the middle of the said property, through the building, with an intention to demolish the said building for widening of the existing road, without giving any notice to the petitioners though it is a private property. Challenging the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed.

¶10

Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appearing for respondent No.2 had produced a copy of instructions of the instructions of the Deputy Executive Engineer (R&B), NH SubDivision, Ongole, vide Lr.No.CourtCases/Kovvur/DEE/LA/2023, dated 21.04.2023, wherein it is stated that

¶11

“the work regarding the widening of road from Two Lane to Four Lane with service roads from Km.1.050 to Km.3.470 with existing link road connecting NH-67 to NH-16 in Kovur Town of WPC mode was sanctioned by MoRT&H, New Delhi and the contractor was finalized by calling tenders. In order

¶12

to execute the above project the site was to be handed over to

¶13

the contractor free from encroachments. The Executive Engineer (R&B) vide letter dated 23.03.2023, has addressed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nellore, who is the competent authority under the Land Acquisition Act for deputing the Revenue Surveyor for demarcation of road boundaries and identification of encroachments. Accordingly, the marking was done by the Revenue Surveyor with the help of NH Staff.”

¶14

Learned Government Pleader on instructions has further submitted that the removal of encroachments will be done only after following due process of law.

¶15

Recording the said instructions, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

¶16

i. The Mandal Surveyor, with the assistance of the Revenue department, shall conduct a survey to identify the extent of land acquired either encroached by the petitioner or acquired by the respondents. This survey shall be conducted in the presence of the petitioners or their representatives.

¶17

ii. For the purpose of enabling the petitioners to be present at the time of the survey, notices shall be given to the petitioners.

¶18

iii. After the survey is conducted, if it is found, that the petitioners have encroached the road margin, it would be open to the respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law. This survey shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

iv. Till such survey is completed, the respondents shall not interfere with the petitioners’ possession over the subject property, without following due process of law.

¶20

7. Accordingly, with the above directions, this writ

¶21

petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶22

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶23

_______________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶24

Date: 21.04.2023.

¶25

Note: CC by 24.04.2023 ASH

¶26

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶27

W.P. No.10256 OF 2023

¶28

Date:21.04.2023

¶29

Note: CC by 24.04.2023

¶30

ASH

Vinakota Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinakota Srinivasa 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

Sk. Nagoor Basha, Vs The Labour Court, Guntur, Guntur District, a. P.

S.Gundu Rao, S/o late Raghavendra Rao, Vs The Managing Director

S. Bhaskar Naik, Rozgar Sevak, Vs The State of Ap, Rep by its Principle Secretary

Guru Prasad Mishra Vs The New India Assurance Company Ltd.

N.Vijayasree, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.v.Naga Vara Prasad, Vs Sri Ksheera Ramalingeswara Swamy Temple