Disposed

Gadiraju Radha Krishna Raju v. The District Collector

Telangana HC8 Apr 2005WP/7768/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a summary eviction notice. The High Court restrained respondents from interfering with the petitioner's possession until a final order is passed based on the requisite notice under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Act.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to respondents not to interfere with petitioner's possession of the land-in-question without passing a final order based on the notice dated 28-03-2005.

Gadiraju Radha Krishna Raju Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 7768 of 2005

¶6

Between:

¶7

Gadiraju Radha Krishna Raju, S/o. Rama Raju Bheemaboina Palem, Village, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

¶8

..... PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Visakhapatnam.

¶11

2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District,

¶12

3 The Mandal Revenue, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District,

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly, a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in issuing proceeding Rc.No. 88/85/A, dt. 28-3-2005 seeking to summarily evict the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac. 5.11 cents in Survey No. 130 of Bheemaboinapalem Village, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and to issue consequential direction directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid land till conclusion of the proceedings initiated under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers), Act, 1977 and the Andhra Pradesh (A.A.) Inams Abolition Act and pass such further order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.PRABHAKAR

¶16

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶17

The Court made the following :

¶18

O R D E R:

¶19

The petitioner was served with a notice dated 28-03-2005 issued by the third respondent, the Mandal Revenue Officer under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rule, 1977, calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be summarily evicted from the land-in-question.

¶20

The grievance of the petitioner is that though still there is time for submitting explanation to the impugned notice, the respondents have been taking steps to dispossess him, highhandedly. Hence, this writ petition.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the land-in-question without passing final order based on the notice dated 28-03-2005. No costs.

¶22

(G. ROHINI, J)

¶23

Date: 08-04-2005

¶24

Note: Issue CC in three days.

B/o

ghn