Dismissed

Picchala Venkata Narayana, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC28 Dec 2023WP/20835/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC regarding dispossessing action. On withdrawn submission by counsel and no objection from respondents, the High Court granted permission to withdraw and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition granted; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn.

Picchala Venkata Narayana, Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMB IK Tk TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT t*.

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20835 OF 70??

¶7

Between;

¶8

Picchala Venkata Narayana, S/o Late Sreeramulu Aged 40 years, R/o.

¶9

D.No.4-28, Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District-

¶10

¶11

Picchala Bhaskar, S/o Late Sreeramulu, Aged 48 years, R/o. D.No.4-

¶12

2B, Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal Prakasam District- 523110.

¶13

Eragala Sharada, W/o. Venkateswarlu, Aged 40 years, D. No. 1-180,

¶14

Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam i District-523110 ...PETITIONERS

¶15

AND

¶16

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

¶17

District

¶18

The District Collector, Prakasam District Ongole

¶19

The Tahsildar, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District

¶20

The Sub Inspector of Police, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District

¶21

The Sarpanch, Kambalapalli Village, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District 6. The Kambaladinne Gram Village, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶22

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated i in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly

¶23

one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents herein dispossess the petitioners from their subject landed property i.e., in Sy No. 325-4 to an extent of Ac. 1.01 cents in Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal, Prakasam District, without following due process of law as arbitrary, illegal, colorable excise of power apart from being voilative of the fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed^{tomeunderArticle} 14, 19, 21 and 300A Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioners subject Property in any manner.

¶24

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶25

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 direct the Respondents No.2 to 6 not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's subject property situated in Sy No. 325-4 to an extent of Ac. 1.01 cents in Kambaladinne Village, Pamur Mandal,^{PrakasamDistrict} forthwith.

¶26

lA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant extension of the interim orders/directions to the respondents not to take any coercive action in respect of the subject matter property, without following due process of Law passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 14.08.2023.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI KOLLURI ARJUN CHOWDARY

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6: SRI G. VENKATA REDDY, SC

¶32

FOR ZPP, MPP AND GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶33

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶34

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶35

WRITPETITION NO.20835 OF 2023

¶36

ORDER;

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that they filed a memo vide U.S.R. No. 125606 of 2023 dated 30.11.2023, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw

¶38

this writ petition and the same is placed on record.

¶39

To the said submission, learned counsel for

¶40

respondents reported no objection.

¶41

Permission is accorded.

¶42

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as

¶43

withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶45

Sd/- B. PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

One CC to Sri Kolluri Arjun Chowdary, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

One CC to Sri G. Venkata Reddy, ZPP.MPP and Gram Panchayat[OPUC]

¶51

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

¶52

Two CC’s to GP for Home, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati[OUT]

¶53

Three CD Copies.

ssb

HIGH COURT

DATED:28/12/2023

ORDER

WP.No.20835 of 2023

OF
O
o
a\
.jk ^'^I'reni^^JUN m mJs
'•‘^cmrs
'-S'?

¶61

DISMISSING THE W.P. AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

Picchala Venkata Narayana, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Picchala Venkata Narayana, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N Rajendra Prasad Vs the State of Ap

Surabi Venkateswarlu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

B v Subbareddy Vs Praveen Prakash,I.a.S

Bayaneni Venkata Narayana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Nagisetti Kondanda Ramaiah Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Polagani Shankar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh