Dismissed

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC25 Sept 2023WP/12794/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the demarcation and impending demolition of his building structure for being arbitrary and illegal. The court held that no cause survives in the writ petition and dismissed it as infructuous without costs, deeming any interim order as vacated.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. No order as to costs.

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12794 OF 2013

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna, S/o. K. Veeranjaneyulu, Aged 58 years, R/o. D.No.1-1208, Gautham Buddha Road, Mangalgiri, Guntur District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶11

The Revenue Divisional Officer (Special Officer), Guntur, Guntur District.

¶12

Mangalgiri Municipality, Mangalgiri, rep. By its Commissioner.

¶13

Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Department, Guntur, Guntur District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 2 to 4 in demarcating the front portion of the building structure of petitioner premises situated at D.No.11208 Gautam Buddha Road, Mangalgiri, Guntur District for demolishing the same and dispossessing the petitioner without there being any notice for acquiring the same, as arbitrary, illegal, violating the principles of natural justice and in violation of petitioners rights guaranteed under Art.14, 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution of India.

¶16

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 15754 OF 2013)

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to stG, the demolition/dispossession of building structures situated at D.No.1-1201 Gautam Buddha Road, Mangalgiri, Guntur District belonging to petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WVMP. NO: 45 OF 2015)

¶19

Between:

¶20

Mangalgiri Municipality, Mangalgiri, rep. By its Commissioner.

¶21

...PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT No.3 AND

¶22

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna, S/o. K. Veeranjaneyulu, Aged 58 years, Rio. D.No.11208, Gautham Buddha Road, Mangalgiri, Guntur District.

¶23

.PETITIONER

¶24

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶25

The Revenue Divisional Officer (Special Officer), Guntur, Guntur District.

¶26

Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Department, Guntur, Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders passed in W.P.M.P.No. 15754 of 2013 in W.P.No.12794 of 2013 dt. 25-04-2013.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. SAI PHANINDRA FOR

¶29

SRI CHALLA GUNARANJAN

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI M. MANOHAR REDDY,

¶32

SC FOR MUNICIPALITY

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FW

¶34

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶36

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶37

WRIT PETITION No.12794 of 2013

¶38

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna, S / o K. Veeranj aneyulu, Age: 58 years, R/ o D,Bi,1-1208, Gautham Buddha Road, Mangalgiri, Guntur District.

¶39

Petitioner

¶40

Versus

¶41

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others.

¶42

... Respondents

¶43

ORDER:

¶44

Sri N. Sai Phanindra Kumar, the learned counsel representing Sri Challa Gunaranjan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, no cause survives in this writ petition. 2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall

¶46

stand closed.

¶47

SD/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶48

//TRUE COPY//

¶49

To, 1. One CC to Sri Challa Gunaranjan, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

SECflOJ"OFFICER 6

¶51

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

¶52

Two CCs to GP for Medical Health & FW, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT]

¶53

One CC to Sri M. Manohar Reddy, SC for Municipality [OPUC]

¶54

Three C.D. Copies.

Cnr

4Aerc vo -r

HIGH COURT

DATED:25/09/2023

ORDER

WP.No.12794 of 2013

F ANDHj
R
-?
= 2 E N0V 2023
C
S Current Section
* DESPATCN EO/

¶62

DISMISSING THE W.P. AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kolli Shiva Ramakrishna v. 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

Lake Raja Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Sundara Rao Vs The Municipal Corporation of Nellore

Bonthu Vimala, W/o. Sreeramulu Vs The Amalapuram Municipality

J Snehalatha Vs the State of Ap

K.Koteswara Rao, and Another Vs State of Ap., Revenue Dept., and 3 Others

Donga Nagamani Vs State of Ap