Disposed

Linga Narendra v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Sept 2024WP/20018/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners alleged temporary tea stalls were placed near their leased shops in a temple complex without allotment or auction. The temple stated no allotment was given and stalls would be demolished. The Court directed removal of the tea stalls and any illegal occupations within one week and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Third respondent directed to remove tea stalls and any illegal occupations within one week from receipt of the order; no order as to costs.

Linga Narendra Vs the State of Andhra… — Municipal and Town Planning | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

\ i ^ i

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 20018 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Linga Narendra, S/o Venkateswarlu, Aged about 54 Years, Occ: Business, R/o D.No. 2-3-6/1, Pattala Ganga Road Srisailam, Nandyal District.

¶10

Linga Jagadeesh, S/o Narendra, Aged about 32 Years, Occ: Business, R/o D.No. 2-3-6/1, Pattala Ganga Road Srisailam, Nandyal^District.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue (Endowments) Department Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi,^Guntur District.

¶14

The Commissioner, Endowments Department Gollapudi, Vijayawada, NTR District.

¶15

Sri Brahamramaba Mallikarjuna Swamyvarla Devasthanam, Srisailam, Nandyal District, Rep. by its Executive Officer.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring action of the 3 rd respondent in not removing the temporary tea stalls placed on the western side of our leased Shop No.C1 and Shop No. D1 admeasuring about 12x15 Feet situated in Lalitambika Complex of 3'^'^ respondent temple as

¶18

bad, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to the orders of this Honble Court in W.P 6753/2020 dated 02.03.2021 and violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to forthwith remove the temporary tea stalls placed the western side of our shops and^{furtherdirectthe3} rd respondent not to permit the 3'’'^ parties to place any new stall/ shops without following due process of law, conducting public auction etc., lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

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 3'^^ respondent to forthwith remove the tea stalls placed on the western side of our Shop Nos. Cl and Shop No. D1 situated in Lalitambika Complex of 3'^^ respondent temple.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.V.SASIDHAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI G.RAMANA RAO,^SCFORSRI BRAHAMRAMABA MALLIKARJUNA SWAMYVARLA DEVASTHANAM The Court made the following; ORDER

APHC010389442024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶26

[3310]

¶27

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

THURSDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 20018/2024

¶32

Between;

¶33

Linga Narendra and Others ...PETITIONER(S)

¶34

AND

¶35

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶37

1.D VSASIDHAR

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶40

The Court made the following:

¶41

ORDER:

¶42

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶43

“ declaring action of the 3"'^ respondent in not removing the temporary tea stalls placed on the western side of^{petitioners’leasedShop} No.C1 and Shop No.D1 admeasuring about 12x15 Feet situated in Lalitambika Complex of respondent temple as bad, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary^{totheordersofthisHon’ble} Court in W.P.6753/2020 dated 02.03.2021 and violative of Articles 14,

¶44

¶45

^ -

¶46

19(1 )(g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently^direct the 3"^ respondent to forthwith remove the temporary tea stalls placed on the western side of petitioners’ shops and further direct the 3'^ respondent not to permit the parties to place any new stall/ shops without following due process of law, conducting public auction etc., and pass such other order or orders ”

¶47

Heard Mr.D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments, appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.G.Ramana Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3'^'^ respondent.

¶48

On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the contentions which are urged in the writ petition. On the other hand Mr.G.Ramana Rao, learned Standing Counsel has produced a copy of written instructions dated 19.09.2024 of the Executive Officer,^wherein it is stated that the temple authorities have not given any allotment^{totheteastallssituatedin} front of the shops of the petitioners and due to internal disputes between the businessmen, they are creating troubles to the respondent temple and further it is stated that the temple authorities are going^{todemolishthesaidteastalls.}

¶49

On hearing the submissions, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 3’’'^ respondent to remove the tea stalls along with any illegal occupations, if any, within a period^{ofoneweekfromthedate} of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, good relation be maintained between the business people and department people.

¶50

¶51

With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall

¶52

be no order as to costs.

¶53

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

¶54

closed.

¶55

//true copy//

¶56

SD/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU assistant registrar ^ CA " section officer

¶57

To,

¶58

The Principal Secretary Revenue (Endowments) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶59

The Commissioner, Endowments Department Gollapudi, Vijayawada,

¶60

NTR District.

¶61

The Executive Officer, Sri Brahamramaba Mallikarjuna Swamyvarla Devasthanam, Srisailam, Nandyal District.

¶62

One CC to Sri D.V.Sasidhar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶63

Two CCs to GP for Endowments, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶64

One CC to Sri Sri G.Ramana Rao, SC for Sri Brahamramaba Mallikarjuna Swamyvarla Devasthanam. [OPUC]

¶65

Three CD Copies.

HIGH COURT

DATED:19/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.20018 of 2024

/>
8^
m|i
V g 0 4 OCT 2C2'i Co/;
^ Current Section ir^

¶73

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Linga Narendra v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Linga Narendra 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

S.Venkataramana Vs The State of Ar

L v Prasad Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Vijaya Durga Aadivaasi Granite and Stone Crusher, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Yerra Eswar Rao, S/o. Y.Rama Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

The Boatmen and Fisherman Coop., Society, Vs Prl.Secy., Mines and Miners, Hyd., and 4 Others

Borusu Ganapathi Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh