Disposed

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Nov 2024WP/36427/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition alleging trespass and attempted demolition of the petitioner's AC sheets house by the Simhachalam Devasthanam. With an interim protection order already in force since 2014, counsel submitted no further orders were needed; the court closed the writ petition, directing respondents to follow due process of law for any future action.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed; respondents permitted to act against petitioner only after following due process of law; no costs.

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy, Vs The State… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 36427 OF 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy, Occ: Employee,^R/o.D.No.37- 10-.196/6, Ayyappa; Nagar, Kapparada, Near Madhuravada, Visakhapatnam. ...PETITIONER(S)

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶11

Sri Varaha Lakshmi Nrusimha Swamyvari Devasthanam, Rep. by its Executive Officer, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam.

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in interfering trespassing and trying to demolish the petitioner's property AC sheets house in an extent of 390 sq.ft, bearing D.No. 37-10-196/6 with Municipal Assessment No. 69500 and water assessment No. ER 14628-1 and Electricity Service Connection oNo. 1111963817 24377 as illegal, unlawful, arbitrary, unconstitution al, violating the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, without any power or authority and in consequence thereof direct the respondents not to interfere into possession and enjoyment of 620 sq.yds equal to 518.40 sq.meters in R.S.No. 12/1 B of Kapparada village, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam of the petitioner

¶14

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WVMP. NO: 4067 OF 2014)

¶15

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

¶16

pleased to vacate the status quo orders passed W.P.M.P.No.45603/2014 in W.P.No.36427/2014 dated 27-11-2014

¶17

¶18

' I.AVNO: 2 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 45603 OF 2014) % *

¶19

¶20

I ‘'v ,, Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances

¶21

^■'^/staled in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be . "^pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with the fpeaceful possession and enjoyment petitioner's property admeasuring 620 sq. yds. equal to 518.40 sq.meters in R.S. No. 12/IB of Kapparada Village, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam including house bearing No. 37-10-196/6, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SVR SUBRAHMANYAM

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI E SAMBASIVA PRATAP

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

APHC010261232014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

[3310]

¶31

TUESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶34

WRIT PETITION NO: 36427/2014

¶35

Between:

¶36

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy ...PETITIONER

¶37

AND

¶38

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

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner;

¶40

1.S VRSUBRAHMANYAM

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶42

1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)

¶43

2.E SAMBASIVA PRATAP

¶44

The Court made the following:

¶45

ORDER:

¶46

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶47

seeking the following relief:

¶48

“ declaring the action of the 2"'^ respondent in interfering, trespassing and trying to demolish the petitioner’s property AC sheets house in an extent of 390 sq. ft. bearing D.No.37-10-196/6 with Municipal Assessment No. 69500 and water assessment No.ER 14628-1 and Electricity Service Connection No.1111963817 24377 as illegal, unlawful, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violating the principles of natural justice and violative of

¶49

¶50

.0^

¶51

Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, without any power or authority and in consequence thereof direct the respondents^{nottointerfere} into possession and enjoyment of 620 sq. yds equal to 518.40 sq. meters in R.S.N0.I2/IB of Kapparada village, Madhavadhara, Visakhapatnam^ofthe petitioner and pass such other order or orders ”

¶52

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant^Government Pleader for Endowments, appearing for the 1®* respondent and learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the 2^^^ respondent.

¶53

This Court vide order dated 27.11.2014 has granted interim order.

¶54

which reads as under:

¶55

“ Since prime facie, the title of possession of petitioner^{isestablishedand} the 2"^ respondent appears to be acting without following the due process of law, there shall be interim direction as prayed for."

¶56

On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits^{thatinviewofthe} interim order passed by this Court, no further orders are required in this writ petition.

¶57

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is closed. However, the respondents are at liberty, if at all, they intend to take any action against the petitioner, they have to follow the due process of^law. No order as to costs.

¶58

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands closed.

¶59

To,

¶60

SD/- B. PRASADA RAO assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// ^ SECTION OFFICER

¶61

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶62

Sri Varaha Lakshmi Nrusimha Swamyvari Devasthanam, Rep. by its Executive Officer, Simhachalam, Visakhapatnam.

¶63

One CC to SRI. S V R SUBRAHMANYAM Advocate [OPUC]

¶64

Two CCS to GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) .High Court Of^Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶65

One CC to SRI. E SAMBASIVA PRATAP Advocate [OPUC]

¶66

THREE CD COPIES

Qi>

HIGH COURT

X V

DATeD:19/11/2024

i •

ORDER

WP.No.36427 of 2014

ANDS^^
§ 2 8 DEC 2C2i cc^
Current Section 1

¶75

CLOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karri Rama Rao, S/o. Late Ram Murthy, 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

Sri Seetharama Swamy Temple, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary

B. Ramanareddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

B Anuradha, Kadapa Dist Vs Prl Secy, Industries & Commerce (M.I) Dept., Guntur Dist & 2

Tammana Venkata Sathi Raju, Kakinada Vs Prl Secy, Endowments Dept, Hyderabad & 3 Others

M.Sudhakar Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Sheik Kasim Peera Vs Commissioner of Endowments, Office of Endowments