Disposed

Jonnalagadda Sai Babu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Feb 2023WP/3086/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the cancellation of Pattadar pass books, the High Court directed the petitioners to file a regular revision before the 2nd respondent within four weeks to resolve their grievance accordingly disposing of the writ.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to file a Regular Revision Petition before the 2nd respondent within four weeks; Writ Petition disposed.

Jonnalagadda Sai Babu Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.3086 of 2023

¶4

Jonnalagadda Sai Babu, S/o. Narasarao, Aged about 50 years, R/o.D.No. 1-100/A, Church Veedi, Vedulukunta, Gopalapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh and 2 others.

¶5

…. Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District and 3 others.

¶8

….Respondents

¶9

ORDER:

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶11

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.

¶12

The grievance of the Writ Petitioners is that the 3^rd respondent passed orders dated 15.09.2021 cancelling the Pattadar pass books issued in Sy.No. 188 of Komatikunta Village of Gopalapuram mandal. It is affecting the rights of the petitioners herein.

¶13

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that against the said impugned orders of the 3^rd respondent dated

¶14

¶15

15.09.2021, the petitioners gave an application to the 2^nd respondent on 13.0.2022 but the same is not acted upon.

¶16

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that the course available for the petitioners is to prefer a regular Revision against the impugned orders of the 3^rd respondent before the 2^nd respondent under Secion 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadhar Passbook Act, 1971 and Rule 23 of the said rules. Instead they made an application on 13.04.2022 which cannot be looked into by the 2^nd respondent.

¶17

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioners are permitted to file a Regular Revision Petition before the 2^nd respondent against the impugned Orders of the 3^rd respondent dated 15.09.2021 by availing the opportunity under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadhar Passbook Act, 1971 r/w Rule 23 of the said rules within a period of (4) four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶18

Thereafter, on receipt of the same the said Revision shall be disposed of by the 2^nd respondent as expeditiously as

¶19

¶20

possible strictly in accordance with law by conducting

¶21

necessary enquiries.

¶22

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶23

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any,

¶24

shall stand closed.

¶25

JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶26

15.02.2023 UPS

Jonnalagadda Sai Babu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jonnalagadda Sai 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajulapati Venkata Raja Ramesh. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Govinda Rao, Vs The District Collector

N. Adinarayan Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Ali Murthuza Vs The Principal Secretary

B. Sivaranjani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Korrapati Naga Siromani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh