Disposed

Sorala Rangamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Sept 2024WP/20303/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus against eviction orders. Relying on a precedent, the Court permitted the petitioner to submit an explanation to the notice within two weeks pending an enquiry. It directed that no coercive steps be taken during the inquiry and specified a timeline for the decision.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit explanation within two weeks; respondent to enquire and decide within eight weeks; no coercive steps pending enquiry.

Sorala Rangamma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 20303 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sorala Rangamma, W/o Late Mahalakshmudu, Age 64, D.No^{1-219/1Karmika} Nagar, Akividu, West Godavari District-534235.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration And Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati.

¶13

The Akividu Nagarpanchayat, Rep by its Commissioner,^WestGodavari District, Andhra Pradesh

¶14

The Collector, West Godavari District, Bhimavaram,^{AndhraPradesh}

¶15

The Tahasildar, Akividu Mandal, Akividu West Godavari District, A.P

¶16

The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub Division,^Undi,West Godavari District

¶17

The SHO, Akividu Police Station, Akividu West Godavari^District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may

¶20

be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents in issuing the impugned eviction order vide. 10/28/2024/G1 through which petitioner is directed to vacate her house located in Sy no.474 and 475 of Akividu Village. West Godavari District within 7 days as illegal arbitrary,^{violationofArticle14} and 21 of the Constitution of India and against principles^{ofNaturalJustice} and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents not to remove/demolish the house of the petitioner situated in Sy no.474 and 475 of Akividu village at Karmika Nagar (Bodigattu), Akividu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶22

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 suspend the impugned eviction Order 10/28/2024/G1 by directing the respondents not to remove/demolish the house of the petitioner situated in Sy no.474 & 475 of Akividu village at Karmika Nagar (Bodigattu), Akividu Village and Mandal, West Godavari District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): M/S RAMANI ANNAM

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI M MANOHAR REDDY,^SCFOR MAUD

¶26

Counsel for the Respondents 3 & 4 : GP FOR REVENUE

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : GP FOR IRRIGATION & CAD

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : GP FOR HOME

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

APHC010399342024

¶31

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶32

[3329]

¶33

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶34

FRIDAY. THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER

¶35

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶36

PRESENT

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO: 20303/2024

Between;

Sorala Rangamma

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶44

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶45

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶46

1.RAMANI ANNAM

¶47

Counsel for the Respondent(S);

¶48

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶49

2.GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV

¶50

3.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶51

The Court made the following order:

¶52

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

¶53

of India seeking the following relief;

¶54

tt to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly^oneinthe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents in issuing the impugned eviction order vide. 10/28/2024/G1 through which petitioner is directed^tovacate her house located in Sy no.474 and 475 of Akividu village, West Godavari district within 7 days as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and against principles of Natural Justice and consequently set

¶55

r {

¶56

¶57

aside the same by directing the respondents not to remove/demoiish the house of the petitioner situated in Sy no. 474 and 475 of Akividu village at Karmika Nagar (Bodigattu) Akividu Village and Mandal, West Godavari district and pass."

¶58

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶59

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel^for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved^{inthisWritPetition} is squarely covered by the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.20048 of 2024 and requested to pass a

¶60

similar order in this Writ Petition also.

¶61

For better understanding the operative portion of the said order reads as follows:

¶62

“In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to submit his explanation enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim to the above said^noticeofthe respondent dated 03.09.2024 within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondent shall proceed with the necessary enquiry pursuant to the above said notice dated 03.09.2024 strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parties concerned including the petitioner and upon verification of the^recordsand the subject construction/encroachment, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight (8) weeks thereafter. Pending the above said enquiry, there shall not be any coercive steps and there shall not be any further encroachments/constructions. ”

¶63

The same is not disputed by learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

In view of the same, let there be a similar order in this case, following the identical lines as in Writ Petition No.20048^of2024dated 12.09.2024.

¶68

In the result, in view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the following directions:

¶69

The petitioner is permitted to submit her explanation enclosing all the necessary documents in support of^her claim to the above said notice of the 2^^ respondent^dated 03.09.2024 within a period of two (2) weeks from the^date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same, the² nd respondent shall proceed with the necessary enquiry pursuant to the above said notice dated 03.09.2024 strictly in accordance with law by hearing all the parties concerned including the petitioner and upon verification^of the records and the subject construction/encroachment, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits,^as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight (8) weeks thereafter. Pending the above said enquiry, there shall not be any coercive steps and^there shall not be any further encroachments/constructions.

¶70

Registry is directed to enclose a copy of the order^dated 12.09.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.20048 of 2024.^Thereshallbe no order as to costs.

¶71

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

¶72

//TRUE COPY//

¶73

Sd/- P.U.V.BHASKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR u

¶74

SECT ON OFFICER

¶75

To,

¶76

The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration^andUrban Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati.

¶77

V w

¶78

The Commissioner, Akividu Nagarpanchayat, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶79

The Collector, West Godavari District, Bhimavaram,^{AndhraPradesh}

¶80

The Tahasildar, Akividu Mandal, Akividu West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶81

The Deputy Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub Division, Undi, West Godavari District

¶82

The SHO, Akividu Police Station, Akividu West Godavari^District.

¶83

One CC to M/S RAMANl ANNAM Advocate [OPUC]

¶84

Two CCs to GP for MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV, High^Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT

¶85

One CC to SRI M MANOHAR REDDY, SC for MAUD [OPUC]

¶86

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

¶87

Two CCs to GP for IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT

¶88

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

¶89

Three CD Copies (Along with Copy of Order dtd. 12.09.2024 in W.P. No.^20048of2024 enclosed herewith)

Madhu

HIGH COURT

DATED: 13/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.20303 of 2024

r*
fXO 2 7 SFP m
• Current Section .

¶96

DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶97

APHC010396782024

¶98

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶99

[3233]

¶100

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶101

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

¶102

PRESENT

¶103

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶104

WRIT PETITION NO: 20048/2024

¶105

Between:

¶106

Prasangi Srinu ...PETITIONER

¶107

AND

¶108

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

¶109

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶110

1.MADHAVA RAO NALLURI

¶111

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶112

1.GP FOR HOME

¶113

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶114

3.GP FOR IRRI AND CAD

¶115

4.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶116

The Court made the following Order:

¶117

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶118

Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶119

This writ petition is filed questioning the encroachment^notice of the 2"'^ respondent dated 03.09.2024 alleging that the petitioner occupied the irrigation canal site area/poramboke in revenue survey Nos.474 & 475 and to show cause why the constructions shall not be

¶120

¶121

removed within seven (7) days from the date of receipt^ofthesaid notice by calling for the explanation of the petitioner.

¶122

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that^underthe guise of the implementation of the common orders of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court dated 14.09.2022, the 2'"'^ respondent IS trying to proceed high-handedly without giving any opportunity of hearing for the petitioner and without following any due procedure to remove the existing structures/residential house/temporary^sheds of the petitioner.

¶123

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the petitioner occupied the irrigation canal site area, raised iron sheet shed house and obtained assessment No. 1188004217. Since similarly situated occupants including the petitioner are causing lot of inconvenience, the drainage is being let out into the canal polluting the waters and in view of the illegal occupation of the irrigation canal land, there is an obstruction for free flow of water into the said canal and all the other villagers are also complaining^about it time and again to the authorities concerned. In view of the common order of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this court in W.P.(PIL).No.140^of2022& batch, the 2 nd respondent issued the impugned notice dated 03.09.2024 for removal of the sencroachments. However, he further submits that the petitioner can submit his explanation to the above said

¶124

¶125

notice dated 03.09.2024 and if so, by following the due procedure the 2'^'^ respondent will take appropriate action.

¶126

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to submit his explanation enclosing all the necessary documents in support of his claim to the above said notice of the 2"'^ respondent dated 03.09.2024 within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same, the 2'^'^ respondent shall proceed with the necessary enquiry pursuant to the above said notice dated 03.09.2024 strictly in^{accordancewithlaw} by hearing all the parties concerned including the petitioner and upon verification of the records and the subject construction/encroac hment, appropriate decision shall be taken on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight (8)^{weeksthereafter.} Pending the above said enquiry, there shall not be any coercive steps and there shall not be any further encroachments/constructions.

¶127

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶128

As a sequel. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶129

JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶130

12.09.2024 MDP

Sorala Rangamma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sorala Rangamma 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

Uppuluri Jitender Vs the State of Ap

Executive Jobbings Vs Sri Shashi Bhushan Kumar IAS

Alle Venkata Siva Reddy, Vs Sri. Sasi Bhushan Kumar, I.A.S.

Samana Ramakrishna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Tumpalli Ravana Vs Garapati Venkata Padma Kumari

Narra Nagajyothi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh