Disposed

B.Nageswara Rao, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC7 Mar 2005WA/422/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appearing at the admission stage, the court declined to entertain the Writ Appeal but granted an interim direction restraining respondents from allotting the suit land to any third parties pending further orders in the underlying writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Interim direction issued restraining respondents from allotting suit land to any third party until further orders.

B.Nageswara Rao, Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI

¶5

and

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.CH.SURYA RAO

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO : 422 of 2005

¶8

(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 04/03/2005 in WPMP NO :5836 of 2005 in W. P. No. 4353 OF 2005 on the file of the High Court.)

¶9

Between:

¶10

1. B.Nageswara Rao, S/o.Late Rayudaiah,

¶11

R/o.Moddulagudem village, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District.

¶12

2. B.Vasantha Rao, S/o.late Rayudaiah,

¶13

R/o.Moddulagudem village, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District.

¶14

..... APPELLANTS

¶15

AND

¶16

1. The District Collector, Khammam District, Khammam.

¶17

2. The Mandal Revenue officer, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District.

¶18

3. The Special Deputy Collector (TW), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District.

¶19

....RESPONDENTS

¶20

Counsel for the Appellant: MR.Y.V.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court at the admission stage made the following :

¶21

ORDER:( Per Mr.Justice M.H.S.Ansari)

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and keeping in view that only a notice before admission has been ordered in the matter with a direction to post the Writ Petition No.4353 of 2005 after two weeks, we are not inclined to entertain the Writ Appeal or to pass any interim direction except that the respondents shall not allot the suit land to any third parties until further orders in the W.P.No.4354 of 2005.

¶23

With the direction as above, the W.A.S.R. is disposed. No costs.

¶24

M.H.S.ANSARI, J

¶25

07-03-2005 T.CH.SURYA RAO,J

¶26

Note:

¶27

C.C. on priority basis.

¶28

B/o. Stp

¶29

¶30

1. The District Collector, Khammam District, Khammam.

¶31

2. The Mandal Revenue officer, Dammapeta Mandal, Khammam District.

¶32

3. The Special Deputy Collector (TW), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District.

¶33

4. 2 CCs to G.P for Social Welfare, High Court buildings, Hyderabad (O.U.T)

¶34

5 2 CD copies.

¶35

6. 2 CCs to the S.O.,Writ Posting Section, High Court of A.P.,Hyderabad.

B.Nageswara Rao, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Nageswara Rao, v. The District Collector

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

M/s. Ncl Seccoplor Limited, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Shine Enterprises, rep.by Manager Mr.Pallate Damodar Vs The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

M/s.Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd., Vs The Principal Secretary

Sri Venkateshwara Rice Industries, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by

M/s. Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Rice and Flour Mills Vs The Government of A.P. Commercial Tax Dept rep by

M/s. Methodex Infers Limited, Vs The Commercial Tax Officer