Disposed

Dunna Ravi Sankar v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC7 Nov 2024WP/25487/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of writ petition challenging final notices for removal of unauthorized structures. Order permitted petitioners to submit explanations within two weeks. Respondent must conduct enquiry within eight weeks with opportunity of hearing. No coercive action or encroachment pending.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to submit explanation; respondent directed to hold enquiry within eight weeks; no coercive action pending.

Dunna Ravi Sankar Vs the State of Ap — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

1 'I

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH aiwaravati (Special Original Jurisdictio n) FRIDAY. THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

present

¶6

the honourable SR, JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶7

^gg!I£II!I!OrLNO; 254«7 np ,n,.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Dunna Ravi Sankar, S/o Venkata Reddy, aged 40 years, R/o M1

¶10

Panchayathi Street,

¶11

ap Govalanka, Tallarevu Mandal, Kakinada District

¶12

Kotnala Satish, S/o Manikyala Rao, Aged 38 years, Occu Cooly, R/o 1- 51/b, Govalanka, Tallarevu Mandal, Kakinada District

¶13

Kotnala Madhu S/o. Kotnala Devanandam Aged 40

¶14

private employee, R/o 1-l49/b years, Occu Govalanka, Tallarevu Mandal

¶15

District, AP 5334646. Kakinada

¶16

Kotnala Devanandam, S/o. Late Venkanna Aged 82

¶17

Cooly, R/o 1.149/b Govalanka, years, Occu Tallarevu Mandal, Kakinada

¶18

District, AP

¶19

Kotnala Chidambaranath, S/o Venkanna, Aged 53

¶20

Government Employee, years, Occu R/o l-43_ Govalanka Tallarevu Mandal,

¶21

Kakinada District, AP 5334646.

¶22

AND

¶23

...PETITIONERS

¶24

T The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

¶25

Panchayati Raj Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District AP.

¶26

1. The District Panchayath Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari AP. ■ Secretnr/ Gr 7 ^-^^^^yat East

¶27

Godavari Dlstn7AP

¶28

...RESPONDENTS

¶29

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated i in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the final notices vide R.C.No.10490138/39/2024(5) dt.04.11.2024 issued by the 3 respondent in directing the petitioners to remove the houses/structures belongs to the petitioners situated at Govalanka Village, Tallarevu Mandal Kakinada District without conducting any enquiry, without following any procedure adhering to law is illegal and arbitrary and also violation of principles of natural justice including vioiation Of Article 300-A of Constitution of India and set aside the hnal notices vide R.C.No. 10490138/39/2024(5) dt.04.11. 2024 issued by the 3rd respondent consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere into peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners houses/structures situated at Govalanka Village, Tallarevu Mandal Kakinada District.

¶30

lA NO: 1 OF 9n9d

¶31

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere into peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners houses/structures situated at Govalanka Viliage, Tallarevu Mandal, Kakinada District by suspending the final notices vide R.C.No. 10490138/39/2024(5) dt.04.11.2024 i issued by the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2; GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND rural development Counsel for the Respondent No.3:SRI Y. KOTESWARA RAO, SC FOR

¶33

ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following: ORDER

APHC010497562024

[3233]

ass

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶38

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶39

FRIDAY .THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶40

PRESENT

¶41

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶42

WRIT PETITION NO: 25487/2024

¶43

Between:

¶44

Dunna Ravi Sankar and Others

¶45

...PETITIONER(S)

¶46

AND

¶47

The State Of Ap and Others

¶48

...RESPONDENT{S)

¶49

Counsel for the Petitioner(S);

¶50

1 .N ASWARTHA NARAYANA

¶51

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶52

1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

¶53

The Court made the following:

¶54

ORDER:

¶55

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader and the learned Standing^Counselfor

¶56

the respondent No.3.

¶57

This writ petition is filed questioning the final notices^issuedby the respondent No.3, dated 04.112024 directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized construction in the subject land covering

¶58

¶59

HBKM,J W.P.No.25487 of 2024

¶60

under the impugned final notices immediately from the date of receipt of the said notices.

¶61

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners was in occupation of the subject land in an extent of AC.O.OIV2 cents in Sy.No.52/4, within the limits of the respondent No.3 Gram Panchayat for so many years without valid documents. They raised huts and they are residing in it. While so, the respondent No.3 alleged that they are not in occupation of the communal site belonging to the respondent No.3 Gram Panchayat and the respondent^No.3 is trying highhandedly to evict the petitioners from the subject land under the guise of the issuance of the impugned final notices, dated 04.11.2024.

¶62

On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submit that if the petitioners submits their explanations^totheabove said final notices, dated 04.11.2024, the same will be considered by the respondent No.3 by following the due procedure. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioners are permitted to submit their explanation, enclosing all the necessary documents in support of their claim to the^{abovesaidfinal} notices, dated 04.11.2024, treating it as only notices, to the respondent

¶63

3 HBKM, J W.P.NO.25487 of 2024

¶64

weeks from the date of the receipt of No.3 within a period of two (02) this order. On receipt of the sahie, the respondent^{No.3shaliproceed} with the necessary enquiry, strictly in accordance^{withlaw,pursuantto} 04.11.2024 by hearing all the the above said final notices, dated concerned including the petitioners giving due opportunity and parties and the subject site area and the verification of the records upon decision shall be taken on its own subject construction, appropriate a period of eight merits, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within (08) weeks thereafter. Pending the above said enquiry , there shall not and there shall not be any further be any coercive action encroachment or construction.

¶65

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, order as to costs. deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no , shall stand As a sequel. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any

¶66

closed.

¶67

Sd/- N. NAGAMMA //TRUE COPY// ASSISTAN^^ISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶68

To,

¶69

The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj, State of^{AndhraPradesh,} Secretariat, Velagapudi Guntur District AP.

¶70

Panchayath Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari, AP.

¶71

The District Panchayath Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari, AP. 3. The Panchayat Secretary, Grama Panchayath, GovalankaGram Mandal, East Godavari District, AP.

¶72

Panchayath, Govalanka, Tallarevu

¶73

One CC to Sri N. Aswartha Narayana, Advocate [OPUC]

¶74

One CC to Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, SC for ZPP, MPP^&Gram Panchayat[OPUC]

¶75

Two CCS to GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies. ssb

■ .5

HIGH COURT

DATED:08/11/2024

ORDER

WP.No.25487 of 2024

Hoa: I 9 NOV 202^ o
7
^ Current Section . ^

¶82

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Dunna Ravi Sankar v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dunna Ravi Sankar v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Doolapalli Shankarayya, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Kandavalli Babu s/o Mastan, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its

Velpola Gangadharaji, S/o Venkata Subba Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Nandamuri Naga Venkata Brahmaji Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

D Md Abdul Razzakh Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

B Lakshmi Narayana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh