Akella Sri Yejan Narayana Murty S/o Rama Sastry v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its

Telangana HC16 Apr 2008WP/3683/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a notice by the Tahsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate directing him to hand over land records under Section 145 Cr.P.C. in pending civil disputes. The court noted that the matter was closed as further action was dropped by the official respondents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to hand over land records as directed. Writ petition closed without costs.

Akella Sri Yejan Narayana Murty S/o Rama Sastry… — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 3683 of 2008

¶5

Between:

¶6

Akella Sri Yejan Narayana Murty S/o Rama Sastry R/o C49 & 50 Madhura Nagar, Classic Homes, ' 304, Yousufguda, Hyderabad.

¶7

..... PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Tahsildar-cum-Mandal Executive Magistrate, Kakinada Urban, office of the Tahsildar, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

¶10

3 Voruganti Satyavathi W/o Eswara Chandra Vidya Sagar, D. No. 200-7-21, Gudivadavari Street, Ramachandraraopeta, Eluru, East Godavari District.

¶11

4 yendamuri Rajarajeswari W/o Satyanarayana

¶12

Near Swatantra Hospital, Krishna Nagar, Rajahmundry.

¶13

5 Gajamgam Veerabhadra Rao S/o Appa Rao

¶14

r/o Gokavaram Village & mandal, East Godavari District.

¶15

6 Mylavarapu Srinivas S/o Atchuta Ramarao

¶16

R/o D. No. 2-10-5, Venkata Nagar, kakinada, East Godavari District.

¶17

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶18

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 writ, one inthe nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, direction or order declaring the actionof the second respondent in directing the petitioner to hand over Ac. 1.10 cents of land in Survey Numbers 105/2 and 106/2 of Ramanaiahpeta Village, kakinada urban, in pursuance of the notice in Ref. E/28/2008 dated 24-1-2008, as arbtirary, illegal and violative of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the abovesaid land as the matter is of civil nature and suit is pending before the civil Court., and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper inthe circumstances of the case.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VISWANATHA REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following :

¶22

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA

¶23

W.P. No. 3683 of 2008

¶24

Oral Order:

¶25

Under the guise that a crime has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No. 240 of 2007 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Sarpavaram Police Station, the 2^nd respondent, namely the Tahsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate, has issued notice dated 24.01.2008, directing the petitioner to attend before him with relevant records on 28.01.2008. It is this notice, which the petitioner called in question in this writ petition.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents before the competent civil Court, and while the said disputes are pending, the 2^nd respondent under the guise that a criminal case has been registered, has issued the impugned notice directing him to appear before him along with the records, which is illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶27

When the matter came up for hearing earlier, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the

¶28

2^nd respondent, namely the Tahsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate, has no right to interfere in and settle civil disputes between private parties, and more so when they are pending before the competent civil Courts.

¶29

In pursuance of the directions of this Court, the

¶30

2^nd respondent-Tahsildar appeared before the Court in person and produced a copy of the fax message dated 26.02.2008 addressed by him to the learned Government Pleader, stating that there is no need to initiate action against the petitioner under Section 145 Cr.P.C. and further action in the matter is dropped. He, however, made an oral statement in the Court that he will hereafter not interfere in civil disputes between parties.

¶31

Having regard to the fact that further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice are dropped, and considering the statement made by the 2^nd respondent-Tahsildar that he will hereafter not interfere in civil disputes, I am of the considered opinion that a lenient view should be

¶32

taken.

¶33

Accordingly, while cautioning the 2^nd respondent-Tahsildar not to interfere in civil disputes and be careful in future, I close the writ petition as no further orders need be passed in the writ petition. No costs.

¶34

________________ N.V. RAMANA, J.

¶35

Dated: 16^th April, 2007. KSR

..... REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}

Akella Sri Yejan Narayana Murty S/o Rama Sastry v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akella Sri Yejan Narayana Murty S/o Rama Sastry v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its

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

Chilukuri Satyanarayana S/o Bhoomaiah Vs The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar

Cmc Limited, a public limited company incorporated under Vs The Tahsildar (Deputy Collector cadre)

M.A. Hameed Khan Vs The Chief Executive Officer

Pentakoti Seetharamaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by District

Brahmandam Balasubrahmanyam, Vs The State of a.P., Rep by its Prl.Secretary Revenue Dept.

Sutapalli Panduranga Rao Vs The Tahsildar