Disposed

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Sept 2023WP/12424/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging allotment of public road to houseless poor under Navarathnalu scheme. Court disposed of the petition directing respondents not to assign pattas in land classified as rasta, subject to due process for classification changes.

What did the court decide?

Direction not to assign house site pattas in land classified as rasta; pending miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed.

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, Vs The State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12424 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, W/o. Venkatasibaiah, Aged about 48 years, R/o. House No. 17-122, Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District523166.

¶8

Boina Yalamandha, S/o. Venkaiah, Aged about 70 years, R/o. House No. 17122, Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District- 523166.

¶9

Boina Venkata Rathnam, W/o. Prasad, Aged about 39 years, R/o. House No. 17-122, Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District- 523166.

¶10

Boina Bhaskara Rao, S/o. Seetharam, Aged about 54 years, R/o. Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District- 523166.

¶11

Boina Venkaiah, W/o. Kotaiaiah, Aged about 48 years, Rio. Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District- 523166.

¶12

Jangili Naga Malleswara Rao, S/o. Chencpurnama, Aged about 41 years, Rio. Boinavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District- 523166.

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, A.P.

¶16

The District Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole.

¶17

The Thasildar, Cheerala Mandal, Cheerala, Prakasam District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to allot the public road which was using as road to the Agricultural lands of the Petitioners covered by S.No. 117, total extent of Ac.1.50 cents in Epurupalem Village, Cheerala Mandal, Prakasam District to the house less poor people under Navarathnalu scheme as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, unreasonable and violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to allot the lands in S.No. 117, total extent of Ac.1.50 cents in Epurupalem Village, Cheerala Mandal, Prakasam District, to any third party as the said land which was using as road to the Agricultural lands of the Petitioners pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI GORLE GOPALAKRISHNA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.12424 OF 2020

¶26

Between:

¶27

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, W/o Venkatasibaiah, Aged about 48 years, R/ o house No.17-122, Bolnavaripalem, Eepurupalem, Prakasam District - 523166 and five others.

¶28

... Petitioners

¶29

Versus

¶30

The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, and two others.

¶31

... Respondents

¶32

Counsel for the petitioners : Sri G. Gopala Krishna Counsel for respondent Nos. l to 3 : GP for Revenue

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶35

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶36

"...issue a writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to allot the public road which was using as road to the Agricultural lands of the petitioners covered by S.No.117, total extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Epurupalem Village, Cheerala Mandal, Prakasam District to

¶37

Page 2 of 5

¶38

SRS, J W.P.No.12424 of 2020

¶39

the house less poor people under Navarathnalu scheme as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, unreasonable and violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to grant such other relief or relief..."

¶40

Averments in affidavit, in brief, are that the petitioners are residents of Epurupalem Village, Cheerala Mandal, Prakasam District. An extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in S.No.117 is shown as rastha. Petitioners having lands, in the vicinity, have been using the subject land as road. The respondent authorities are intending to allot house site pattas in the subject land, which was classified as road/rasta. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed the above writ petition.

¶41

Counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.3. It was contended inter-alia, that though the land in Sy.No.117 of an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents is classified as donka/rastha, there is no donka/rasta on the ground, in fact, it is vacant, and is fit for allotment of house site pattas. Gram Panchayat, Epurupalem Dasse d resolution dated 02.06.2020 expressingwillingness for grant of house site pattas. Further action is under process for publication of withdrawal notification under Section 58(2) of

¶42

Page 3 of 5

¶43

SRS, J W.P.No.12424 of 2020

¶44

Andhra Pradesh Grama Panchayats Act (for short "The Act"). Eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶45

Heard Sri G. Gopala Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. l to 3.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions as per the averments in the affidavit and learned Government Pleader for Revenue reiterated the contentions as per averments in the counter affidavit.

¶47

As seen from the Adangal filed as Exhibit P1, FMB sketch as Exhibit P2 and the copy of adangal filed along with the counter affidavit at page No.10, an extent of Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy.No.117 is shown as rasta. No assignment of house site pattas is permissible in respect of rasta/road. However, in the counter affidavit, it was contended that Gram Panchayat passed resolution dated 02.06.2020, to withdraw notification under Section 58(2) of the Act. Unless and until the classification is changed, the assignment of house site pattas in the subject land is not permissible.

¶48

Page 4 of 5

¶49

SRS, J W.P.No.12424 of 2020

¶50

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents not to assign house site pattas in respect of land referred to supra, which is classified as rasta. However, this order will not come in the way of respondents to follow due process. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶52

stand dismissed.

¶53

Sd/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

LCD

SECTION OFFICER

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, A.P.

¶58

The District Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole.

¶59

The Thasildar, Cheerala Mandal, Cheerala, Prakasam District.

¶60

One CC to Sri Gorle Gopalakrishna, Advocate [OPUC]

¶61

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶62

Three C.D. Copies Cnr

HIGH COURT

DATED:13/09/2023

ORDER

WP.No.12424 of 2020

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

¶69

of ANDIgf
R
V
09 NOV 2023
* Current Section *,
~tS?gTCN~~j'-

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yerrakula Venkata Rathnam, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Gejja Nagaiah Vs the State of Ap

Mane Eranna, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Boya Chenna Keshavulu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Gudala Amara, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Harijana Subbamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Chand Basha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh