COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI…
Direction not to interfere with the petitioner's property without following due process of law as contemplated under the Act.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURTOF ANDHRAPRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 13463 OF 2018
Between:
Datla Venkata Satyakrishnam Raju, S/o. Late Datla Giridhara Raja Raju, Aged 74 years, Agriculture R/o. 27-17-17/5/2, Prakasam Street Bhimavaram, West Godavari District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare the proceedings of the2' respondent dated 25-03-2018 issued U/s 6 of Madras Act-3 of 1905 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same..
IA NO: 1 OF 2018
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 suspend the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 25-03-2013 issued U/s 6 of Madras Act 3 of 1905, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B. CHANDRA SHEKHAR
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMMON AREA DEVELOPMENT
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION No.13463 of 2018
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 2itd respondent dated 25.03.2018 issued under Section 6 of Madras Act-3 of 1905 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and consequently set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders "
show cause notice, the petitioner submitted her explanation. He further submits that the 2nd respondent is not the competent authority to issue a show cause notice. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 25.03.2018 directing the petitioner to vacate the said land. Assailing the same the present Writ Petition is filed.
disposed of. There shall be no order asto costs.
Consequently, MiscellaneousPetitions,ifany,pending in
the writ petition shallstand closed.
Sd!- U. SRIDEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
; SE TION OFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
DATED:07/08/2023
ORDER
WP.No.13463 of 2018
31 OCT 2023
DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus to declare proceedings under Section 6 of Madras Act-3 of 1905 as illegal and set them aside.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Datla Venkata Satyakrishnam Raju
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Irrigation Department
The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
