Dismissed

Bayaneni Venkata Narayana v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC28 Dec 2023WP/27147/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners challenged the failure of authorities to prevent vehicles from using a private pathway. The Court held it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate rights over private property under Article 226 and dismissed the petition, directing petitioners to file a civil suit.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Petitioners may approach the competent civil court.

Bayaneni Venkata Narayana Vs the State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶2

Writ Petition No.27147 of 2023

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The short grievance of the petitioners is non-

¶5

consideration of the petitioner’s application submitted through Spandana Programme on 13.12.2021, 14.03.2022 to the District Collector, Eluru, for taking appropriate action to prevent running of school buses, autos and other vehicles through the private pathway leading to the 11^th respondent school to Main Road, situated in Survey No.52/2 Alampuram village, Pentapadu Mandal, West Godavari District.

¶6

Heard Sri Gandham S.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that, the petitioners made applications through Spandana on 13.12.2021 and 14.03.2022 to the 7^th respondent-District Collector, Eluru, West Godavari District and on 25.04.2022 to the 6^th respondent-the Road Transport Officer, Tadepalligudem, for taking appropriate action to prevent the running of school buses, autos and other vehicles through

RC, J

W.P.No.27147 of 2023

the private pathway leading to the 11^th respondent school to Main Road. Despite lapse of considerable time, the authorities did not take steps in that regard.

¶12

Perused the material available on record.

¶13

Admittedly, the subject pathway is a private pathway. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities are not preventing the running of school buses from using the pathway, which is exclusively a private pathway. It is a settled law that this court or respondent authorities cannot adjudicate the rights of individuals over private pathway. If they have any grievance in respect of the same, they have to approach the competent civil court for adjudicating their rights and this court cannot adjudicate the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As such, the writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶14

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, this order does not preclude the petitioners from approaching the competent civil court for adjudicating their rights in respect of subject path way, if they are advised to do so. There shall be no order as to costs.

RC, J

W.P.No.27147 of 2023

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶19

_________________________ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J

¶20

Date: 28.12.2023

¶21

Ksn

Bayaneni Venkata Narayana v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bayaneni 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

Issues for consideration

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

Picchala 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