Dismissed

M J Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC30 Aug 2023WP/14707/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, in WP No. 14707 of 2020, summarily dismissed the petition alleging illegal proceedings against petitioners' land as infructuous due to the afflux of time, without awarding costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous and the case order issued a writ of Mandamus was set aside implicitly by dismissal.

M J Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

io u
%

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 14707 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

1. M J Babu, S/o. M.Janakirama Naidu, Age. 44 years R/at Pandarjuapuram, Nagari post, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶9

M.RIani, W/o. late M.Ramu, Age. 38 years R/at. Nagaripeta, Nagari post, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶10

S.Premalatha, W/o. C.K.Krupanidhi, Age. 49 years R/at. Nagari village and post, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur.

¶14

The Joint Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District,

¶15

Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor District,

¶16

The Tahsildar, Nagari, Chittoor District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 3rd respondent in not revoking the proceedings in Roc.G/2920/2019, dt.17-10-2019 in so far as petitioners respective bits of land are concerned as per the petition submitted by the petitioners on. 08-11-2019 and also in the light of report of 4th respondent in Roc.A/249/2019, dt.19-11-2019 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, without jurisdiction , high handed and on extraneous considerations and against section 8 (2) . of AP Records of Rights in Land and Pattadar pass book act 1971, and consequently setaside the proceedings in Roc.G/2920/2019, dt.17-10-2019 issued by the 3rd respondent in so far as petitioners.respective bits of land are concern.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶20

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 suspend the proceedings in Roc.G/2920/2019, dt.17-10-2019 on the file of the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶22

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 fix an early date for hearing of WP 14707/2020. Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI. L J VEERA REDDY

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents : THE ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶26

WRIT PETITION No. 14707 OF 2020

¶27

ORDER;

¶28

Sri L.J.Veera Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners

¶29

would submit that by afflux of time, the writ petition has

¶30

become infructuous.

¶31

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is

¶32

dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

¶33

.,, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this case, shall

¶34

stand closed.

¶35

Sd/-S SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTER

¶36

//TRUE COPY//

¶37

To, 1. One CC to SRI. L J VEERA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CO to THE ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL Advocate [OPUC] ^^^g^Two CD Copies

SECTION OFFICER

HIGH COURT

DATED:30/08/2023

7<>
'x li4t»7n?3

ORDER

WP.No.14707 of 2020

¶44

"4^
''(4)2.1

¶45

DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

¶46

M J Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M J Babu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lakkimsetty Sita Maha Lakshmi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Guntamadugu Krishnama raju Vs The State of Ap

Manegar Vali Sab Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Geega Satyanarayana, Vs the State of Ap

Malta Srikanth, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M.Mani, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh