Dismissed

Surabi Venkateswarlu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC27 Dec 2023WP/24488/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, dismissed Writ Petition No. 24488 of 2022 as withdrawn with permission to withdraw pleasing costing accused as withdrawn. The petitioner had sought prohibition on dispossession of land pending due process.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Permission to withdraw is accorded. No order as to costs.

Surabi Venkateswarlu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY. THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 24488 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

Surabi Venkateswarlu, S/o Chinna Pitchaiah, aged about 51 years, R/o Jalalapalem, Brahmanapalli, Vinukonda Mandal, Palnadu District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary,^Revenue Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati,^{GunturDistrict}

¶11

The District Collector, Palnadu District, at Narasaraopet. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu^District.

¶12

The Tahasildar, Vinukonda Mandal, Vinukonda, Palnadu^District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, more particularly the 4th respondent, in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the property admeasuring Ac.2.45 cents in Sy.No.229/3-7 and Ac.2.52 cents in Sy.No.229/3-8 situated in Vinukonda Village and Mandal, Palnadu District, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14, 21 and^{300-AoftheConstitutionof} India and consequently the direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the above land.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶16

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 direct the 4th respondent not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac.2.45 cents in Sy.No.229/ 3-7 and Ac.2.52 cents in Sy.No.229/38 situated in Vinukonda Village and Mandal, Palnadu District, pending disposal of writ petition

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI. P NARASIMHULU

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

<RC,3 'W.(PMo.24488 of2022

¶21

¶22

¶23

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION No. 24488 of 2022

¶24

ORDER;

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo enclosing affidavit of the writ petitioner seeking permission^{ofthisCourttowithdraw} the writ petition.

¶26

Perused the affidavit.

¶27

Permission as sought is accorded.

¶28

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.^There

¶29

shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications, pending if any, shall stand closed and interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated.

¶31

SD/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶32

//TRUE COPY//

¶33

SECT

¶34

To, 1. One CC to SRI. P NARASIMHULU Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. Three CD Copies

Madhu ssb

f t

HIGH COURT

DATED:27/12/2023

ORDER

WP.No.24488 of 2022

,¥<J ■<A-
Ho
V\ 2 k my 2o?i,
'- :?•;: ll'CHEO J
WITHDRAWN
o

¶42

DISMISSING THE WP AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

Surabi Venkateswarlu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surabi Venkateswarlu, v. 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

Bathula Shiva Chinnayya, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Devineni Venkata Ratnam Vs the State of Ap

Maramreddy Sreenivasula Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N Rajendra Prasad Vs the State of Ap

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

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