Disposed

M Rajashekar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Feb 2023WP/3282/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the inaction of the Tahsildar in considering a request to remove petitioner's land from the prohibited list under the Registration Act. The court disposed of the petition by directing authorities to process the application within a stipulated timeframe.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's representation dated 08.08.2022 to be considered and disposed of within four months of receiving the online application.

M Rajashekar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

%fo’
^50 4 b
I 1

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 3282 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

M Rajashekar, S/o Mahesh Kumar, Age about 28 years, R/o D.No 10-3-A3, Anathapuram town and District

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, AP Government Secretariat, VeTagapudi, Amaravati.

¶13

The District Collector, Annamayya District, Rayachoti.

¶14

The Tahsildar, Madanapalli Mandal, Annamayya District.

¶15

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 in WRIT of MANDAMUS aggrieved by the action of the Respondent in in not considering the Petitioners Representation Dated 8.8.2022 for deletion of Petitioner land from prohibitory list and violative of Articles 300-A, 14, and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith consider the Petitioner Representation Dated 8.8.2022 and act accordingly.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶17

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 direct the 2"^ Respondent to forthwith consider the Petitioner Representation Dated 8.8.2022 and act accordingly pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI. S SRINIVASA RAO

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI

¶22

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.3282 of 2023

¶24

Between:

¶25

M. Rajashekar, S/o. Mahesh, Aged about 28 years, R/o.p.No. 10-3-A3, Aanthapuram town and District.

¶26

Petitioner

¶27

And

¶28

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal' Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and 2 others.

¶29

Respondents

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.

¶32

The grievance of the Writ Petitioner is that the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.08.2022 addressed to the 2"‘i respondent has not been considered so far. Hence, this Writ Petition. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the vendor and he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land in an extent of 99 Sq.yards situated in Sy.No.533-2A Of Bandamedha^mmapalli Village, Madapalli Mandal,

¶33

2 :} •

¶34

Annamayya District which was purchased by him vide re^stered Sale Deed No.6799 of 2014. While so, the petitioner intended to sell the said land and the sale deed was presented before the Sub-Registrar, Madanapalli Mandal and the same was returned with an endorsement saying that the land in Sy.No.533-2A in an extent of 99 Sq.yards is a prohibited land under Section 22-A(l)(a) of Registration Act. Then the petitiotner made a representation to the 2"^ respondent to delete the same from the prohibited list vide his representation, dated 08.08.2022. But no action has been taken so far. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submits that relying upon the written instructions to the effect that if the petitioner makes an • . application either through the Village Secretariat or through the Mee Seva centre to the 2^^ respondent for consideration of his case to delete the said land from the prohibition list within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. On receipt of such Online Application from the petitioner, the respondent shall consider and dispose of the same strictly in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible by hearing ail the parties concerned. The 2'id respondent shall complete the whole process within a period of four (04) months thereafter.

¶35

¶36

¶37

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall

¶38

stand closed.

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

SD/- U. SRIDEVI ASSISTANT, REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To, 1. The Principal Secretary. Revenue Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, AP Government Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The District Collector, Annamayya District, Rayachoti. 3. The Tahsildar, Madanapalli Mandal, Annamayya District. 4. One CC to SRI. S SRINIVASA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCS to GP for REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies MSR

¶42

HIGH COURT

¶43

DATED: 10Z02Z2023

¶44

ORDER

¶45

WP.No.3282 of 2023

¶46

I* 3 0 AUG 2023 j
X, Current Section

¶47

DISPOSING OF WP WITHOUT COSTS*

¶48

M Rajashekar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M Rajashekar 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

Talari Suribabu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

P Srinivasa Rao Vs the State of Ap

Mamidisetti Venkateswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Vemula Chinnappa/Yamala Chinnappa Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kothamaddi Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Talari Chalapathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh