Disposed

Bondalapati Srinivasulu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Apr 2024WP/8440/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A landholder alleged third parties entered his agricultural land and the Tahsildar ignored his representation seeking removal of their huts. Counsel requested a direction to consider the representation; despite noting an Apex Court view against such directions, the court disposed of the writ petition directing the Tahsildar to consider it in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, to consider the representation dated 10.02.2024 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders; no costs.

Bondalapati Srinivasulu Vs the State of Andhra… — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

FRIDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 8440 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Bondalapati Shnivasulu, S/o Late Bondalapati Nagendraiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o Timmasamudram (Vil) Jaladanki Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore District ...PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi,^Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh State.

¶10

The District Collector, Nellore, S.P.S.R.Nellore District.

¶11

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, S.P.S.R.Nellore^District.

¶12

The Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, Jaladanki, S.P.S.R.Nellore^District

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

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 a Writ, order or , direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, S.P.S.R. Nellore District in not considering the representation dated 10-02-2024 submitted by the Petitioner is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and consequently direct the Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, Jaladanki, S.P.S.R.Nellore District to consider the representation dated 1002-2024 submitted by the Petitioner and further direct the Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, Jaladanki, S.P.S.R. Nellore District^{toremovethehuts} raised by the 3rd Parties with Tarpaulin.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶16

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 Tahsildar, Jaladanki Mandal, Jaladanki, S.P.S.R. Nellore District to consider the representation dated:^{10-02-2024submitted} by the Petitioner, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH C KRISHNA REDDY

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI

¶21

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.8440 OF 2024

¶23

Bondalapati Srinivasulu, S/o Late Bondalapati Nagendraiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Timmasamudram Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶24

... Petitioners

¶25

Versus

¶26

The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, A.P and Three others.

¶27

... Respondents

¶28

Counsel for the petitioner; Sri Ch.C.Krishna Reddy

¶29

Counsel for respondents : GP for Revenue

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned^Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶32

The writ petition is filed to declare the action of^theTahsildar Jaladanki Mandal, Jaladanki, SPSR Nellore District in not

¶33

Page 2 of 4

¶34

SRS, J WP No.8440/2024

¶35

considering the representation dated 10.02.2024 of^{thepetitioner,as} illegal and arbitrary.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the land^toanextentof Ac.5.00 cents in Sy.No.825 situated at Timmasamudram^Village, Jaladanki Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. The petitioner’s father occupied the said land about 45 years ago and developed^thesame. His father died on 23.08.2009 and since then the petitioner^hasbeen in possession and enjoyment of the same by cultivating^blackgram etc. Some third parties entered upon the land on 22.01.2024^and hence the petitioner made representation to the Tahsildar.^However, the Tahsildar is not considering the same, hence the^{writpetition.}

¶37

Learned counsel, during the arguments would submit that without going into other aspects of the matter, a direction^toconsider the representation is sufficient.

¶38

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue consented that the authority will dispose of the representation^made by the petitioner dated 10.02.2024, if any, in accordance^withlaw.

¶39

Page 3 of 4

¶40

SRS, J WP No.8440/2024

¶41

Though the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of The Government of India vs. P.Venkatesh^ held that directing the officials to dispose of the representation would not^{servethecause} of justice, in view of the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested the Court to issue a direction to the authorities to dispose of the representation dated 10.02.2024 submitted by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion^thatthere is no other alternative except to issue such direction^{totheauthorities.}

¶42

In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Tahsildar-4’'^ respondent to consider the representation^dated 10.02.2024 made by the petitioner, strictly in accordance^with law and pass appropriate orders No costs.

¶43

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶44

stand dismissed.

¶45

To,

¶46

Sd/- P.U.V.BHASKARA RAO //TRUE COPY// ASSISTAI^Q^EGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶47

One CC to Sri Ch C Krishna Reddy Advocate [OPUC]

¶48

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

¶49

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED: 12/04/2024

ORDER

^ 0 2 IAN 20?')
^2:
^ . Current Section

¶55

WP.No.8440 of 2024

¶56

DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Bondalapati Srinivasulu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bondalapati Srinivasulu 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

Eeka Subba Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chukkaluri Chinna Krishnamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

State Bank of India, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chikoiu Vijay kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

D Bala Subramanyam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Muligeri Chinna Hanumanthu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh