Disposed

Santhosh kumar Panigrahi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Jan 2023WP/8842/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging demolition action for alleged violation of fundamental rights. Court ordered survey to demarcate road margins and establish encroachment before any action or acquisition of petitioner's land.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to conduct survey demarcating road margins, allow objections, and follow due process law before taking action or acquiring land.

Santhosh kumar Panigrahi Vs The State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 8842 of 2021

¶2

O R D E R:

¶3

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the action of the respondent Nos.3 to 5 in trying to demolish the 5 zinc roofed temporary shop rooms situated in western row of Raja Street Main road Mandasa Town and Mandal, Srikakulam District bounded by East Road North Road leading to Raja Street at South side neighbor house building of Baratamviswanadham bearing D.No.3124 and west photo studio of Prakasa Rao Patnaik measuring East to West 18 cubits or 27 feet and North to south 24^1/2 cubits or 37 feet without following due process of law and without issuing any notice to the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.

¶4

The contention of the petitioner is that they are in the possession of the property since 1961 and they purchased the property with a regular sale deed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents without any authority interfering with the possession of the property of the petitioner herein by violating the Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.

¶5

Learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings submits that they are not interfering with the possession of the petitioner’s property. The same was contended by the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

¶6

The Tahsildar/respondent No.3 has filed counter stating that all the land mentioned in the sale deed is located in the backyard of the encroachment shown in Sy.No.173 road margin as earmarked in the F.M.B sketch and the petitioner is occupying the road margin encroachment in Sy.No.173. The Gram Panchayat issued house cum shop approval for the document bounded site only but not for the road encroachment site.

¶7

There is no provision for payment of compensation in respect of road margin encroachment and also asserted that the order in W.P.No.16329 of 2019 is not applicable to the present facts of the case. The petitioner is not disputing that he is in possession of the property and he is the owner of the property.

¶8

In the above said circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶9

i. The respondents are directed to conduct a survey to demarcate the existing road margins after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the

¶10

survey to be conducted by the respondents;

¶11

ii. If the petitioner is having any objection with regard to the alleged survey and the survey report, she is entitled to submit her objections;

¶12

iii. The respondents are entitled to take appropriate action by following due process of law, if there is any encroachment of the Government land;

¶13

iv. If there is no encroachment, the respondents shall follow due process of law if they intend to acquire the land of the petitioner by paying compensation.

¶14

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

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

¶16

_________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 23.01.2023

SCS/BRS

109

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶21

W.P. No. 8842 of 2021

¶22

Date: 23.01.2023

¶23

SCS/BRS

Santhosh kumar Panigrahi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh kumar Panigrahi 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

M.Khadar Baig, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Meda Adinarayana Vs Sri Shamsher Singh Rawath IAS

Sudalagunta Sugars Employees Union, Vs Union of India

A.Sadasiva Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Prudhvi Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Usha Sankar constructions, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh