Dismissed

K. Bhaskara Rao v. The State of a.P., rep by its

Telangana HC25 Oct 2004WP/16746/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order dismissed a writ petition challenging a revenue officer's order under the Andhra Pradesh Land Revenue Act. The court relegated parties to pending civil and revision proceedings and ordered status quo pending those outcomes. No substantive legal principle was laid down.

What did the court decide?

Status quo as on today; petitioners referred to pending revision before Joint Collector.

K. Bhaskara Rao Vs The State of a.P., rep by its — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 16746 of 2003

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 K. Bhaskara Rao S/o K. Subbaiah

¶9

R/o plot No. 29 in Sy. No. 240 of Nizamapet Road, Ranga

¶10

Reddy District.

¶11

2 M. bala ramaiah s/o M. Ramaiah R/o plot No. 31 in Sy. No. 240 of

¶12

Nizamapet Road, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

3 M. Nagamalleswara Rao M. Venkat Rao, R/o Plot No. 33 & 35 in

¶14

Sy. No. 240 & 241 of Nizamapet Road, Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

4 P. Sivanarsinga Rao S/o Malla rao, R/o plot No. 33 &35 in Sy. No. 240

¶16

& 241 of Nizamapet Road, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

..... PETITIONERS

¶18

AND

¶19

1 The State of A.P., rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue

¶20

Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶21

2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Khairatabad,

¶22

Hyderabad.

¶23

3 The Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue officer, District, rep by Quthbulla Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 Smt. P. Manju w/o late Madhusudhan, r/o Flat No. 401,

¶24

Seetha Residency, Brahminwadi, Begumpet, Hyderabad.

¶25

.....RESPONDENTS

¶26

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 29-3-2003 passed by the 3rd respondent in proceeding No. A/4272/2002 declaring the said proceedings as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and unenforceable and

¶27

consequently quash the same.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.V.RAVINDER RAO

¶29

Counsel for Respondents 1 to 3: G.P. for Revenue

¶30

Counsel for Respondent No.4: MR.E.AJAY REDDY

¶31

The Court made the following :

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

The petitioners challenged the order of the third respondent dated 29.3.2003 purportedly passed under Section 166 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) Land Revenue Act, 1317 Fasli. In a related matter against the order passed in favour

¶34

of the fourth respondent the petitioners herein filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District East, which was dismissed. The petitioners again filed revision petition before the Joint Collector, which is pending.

¶35

In that view of the matter relegating the parties to approach the Joint Collector and raise all the grounds, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Having regard to the suits and counter suits between the parties and also the interlocutory orders passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.394 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, there shall be status quo as on today.

¶36

V.V.S. Rao, J.

¶37

25^th October, 2004.

¶38

Js.

¶39

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶40

¶41

1 The Principal Secretary, State of A.P., Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Khairatabad,

¶42

Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Collector & Mandal Revenue officer, District, rep by Quthbulla Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 4 2 CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶43

5 2 CD copies.

K. Bhaskara Rao v. The State of a.P., rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Bhaskara Rao v. The State of a.P., rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.S.R. Buildings Owners Wel.Asso. Vsp Vs Comm. Visakapatnam Municipal Corp. Vsp.

Majeti Panduranganath Vs the Commi.Guntur Muni.Corp.Guntur

S.Balusaku Vs Asst Engr. Telecommunication Tekkali Andan

Smt.M.Sivamma Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Chintalapati Pullam Raju Vs The District Collector,Eluru

Suraram Malla Reddy and 13 Ors. Vs the Dist.Collector Rr Dist.and 3 Ors.