Disposed

Sane Bala Subbaiah, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Sept 2023WP/4882/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by petitioners against eviction and alleged encroachment in their land. The court did not decide merits but directed respondents to process the petitioner's explanation and directed non-interference with the property pending final orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider petitioner's explanation; prohibited interference with property pending orders; no costs.

Sane Bala Subbaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA^{PRADESH :: AMARAVAf'}

¶2

. "
;•+ . K.; '' ` ~," ~,~~~

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO TH OU SAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 4882 OF 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sane Bala Subbaiah, S/o. Late Saane Subbaiah, Aged about 60 yrs, Occ: Former, R/o Sangapatnam Village and Post, Owk Mandalam, Kurnool District.

¶10

Sana Krishnaiah, S/o. Pedda Subba Rayudu, Aged about 42 yrs, R/o. Sangapatnam Village and Post, Owk Mandalam, Kurnool District.

¶11

..PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Secretariat's Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶14

The Chief Conservator of Forest, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶15

The District Forest Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶16

The Forest Range Officer, Dhone, Kurnool District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 orders, direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to disposes the petitioners and evict them from the extents of their lands admeasuring Ac.2.7lcents each, in Sy.No.637/1B and 637/1B1 situated in Sangapatnam Village, Owk Mandal of Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of Article 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents not to evict and disposes the petitioners from their lands admeasuring Ac.2.71 cents each, in Sy.No.637/1 B and 637/1 B1 situated in Sangapatnam Village, Owk Mandal of Kurnool.

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to disposes the petitioners from their respective extents of lands admeasuring Ac.2.71 cents each, in Sy.No.637/1B and 637/1B1 situated in

¶21

Sangapatnam Village, Owk Mandal of Kurnool, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SAl GANGADHAR CHAMARTY

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶26

WRIT PETITION NO.4882 OF 2022

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶29

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶30

"to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to disposes the petitioners and evict them from the extents of their lands admeasuring Ac.271 cents each in Sy. No 637/ 1 B and 637/ 1 B 1 situated in Sangapatnam Village, Owk Mandal of Kurnool District as illegal arbitrary violative of principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Article 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to evict and disposes the petitioners from their lands admeasurinq Ac.2-71 cents each in Sy. No 637/ 1 B and 637/ 1 B 1 situated in Sangapatnam Village, Owk Mandal of Kurnool and pass."

¶31

On 07.09.2023, the Forest Range Officer, Banaganapalli Range, Kurnool District, has issued notice to the petitioner alleging that he has encroached land of an extent of Ac.2-71 cents in Sy.No.637/B and sought for an explanation within 15 days as to why he should not be evicted from the aforementioned land, treating him as an encroacher.

¶32

No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents.

¶33

Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court, without touching the merits of the case, to permit the petitioner to explanation to the petitioner and

¶34

NV,J WP_4882_2022

¶35

¶36

thereafter, direct the respondents to consider the explanation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders.

¶37

S. Learned Government Pleader for Forests readily agreed to proposal made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the respondent - authorities would dispose of the explanation submitted by the petitioner.

¶38

In view of the submission made by the Government Pleader for Forests, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in "The Government of India v. P.Venkateshl", wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation/explanation, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶39

In the result, the writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to submit appropriate explanation to the Notice dated 07.09.2023 to the respondents within a period of two weeks from today. Upon receipt of the explanation, Respondent

¶40

'2019(8) SCALE 544

¶41

NV.J WP 4882 2022

¶42

No.4 shall consider the explanation and pass appropriate orders within two (02) weeks thereafter. Till then, the respondents are specifically directed not to interfere with the property of the petitioner. No costs.

¶43

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶44

Sid- P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

'SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal^{Secretary, Forest Department, State of Andhra Pradesh,} Secretariat's Buildings, Velagapudi,^{Amaravati, Guntur District.} 2. The Chief Conservator of^{Forest, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.}

¶50

The District Forest^{Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District.}

¶51

The Forest Range Officer, Dhone,^{Kurnool District.}

¶52

One CC to Sri Sal^{Gangadhar Chamarty, Advocate [OPUC]} 6. Two CCs to GP for Forests,^{High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]}

¶53

Three C.D. Copies..

Cnr

HIGH COURT

DATED: 15/09/2023

ORDER

WP.No.4882 of 2022

pF ANOI1
1 0 N0V 2023
H
R Current Section *
°ESPATCt1t°

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Sane Bala Subbaiah, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sane Bala Subbaiah, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravuri Venkateswarlu Vs Gopala Krishna Dwivedi,I.a.S

V.Sudha Vs M.T.Krishna Babu

N Govindu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Chittibommala Surya Kumari Vs the The State of Andhra Pradesh

P Panduranga Vs New and Renewable Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. (Nredcap)

Katepogu Raju Vs the Government of Ap