Disposed

Smt.Kalapati Venkatamma v. The Tahsildhar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District

Telangana HC2 Apr 2008WP/7099/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a petition regarding eviction attempts without considering the petitioner's explanation under the AP Assigned Lands Act, the High Court directed the first respondent to consider the explanation and pass final orders. Pending this, eviction is stayed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed not to be evicted until the explanation is considered and final orders are passed.

Smt.Kalapati Venkatamma Vs The Tahsildhar, Srikalahasti… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2008)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

¶3

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7099 of 2008

¶4

Between:

¶5

Smt.Kalapati Venkatamma W/o.late Pandaiah R/o.Valivedu village Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District

¶6

..... PETITIONER

¶7

AND

¶8

1 The Tahsildhar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District

¶9

2 The Tahsildhar, Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District

¶10

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶11

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 to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directing declaring the action of the first respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioner without passing orders on the Explanation dated 4.3.2008 in response to Form-I Notice dated 20.1.2008 served on the petitioner on 4.3.2008 under sec.3(2) of AP Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and further direct the respondents not to disposes the petitioner without following the procedure stipulated under the Act and pass

¶12

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.RAGHU

¶13

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE

¶14

The Court made the following :

¶15

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 7099 of 2008

¶16

Order:

¶17

Responding to the notice dated 20.01.2008, issued by the

¶18

1^st respondent, namely the Tahsildar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, in Form-I, under Rule 3 of the A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 2007, the petitioner states that she submitted her explanation on 05.03.2008 and it is her grievance that without considering her explanation and without passing any final orders thereon, the respondents are trying to evict her from the land in question.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and both of them agreed for disposal of the writ petition with the following directions:

¶20

The 1^st respondent, namely the Tahsildar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District, is directed to consider the explanation dated 05.03.2008 submitted by the petitioner pursuant to the show cause notice and pass final orders thereon in accordance with law, if not already passed. Till then, the respondents are directed not to evict the petitioner from the land in question.

¶21

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶22

___________________

¶23

N.V. RAMANA, J.

¶24

Date: 02.04.2008 Ksr/Nsr

..... REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

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

Smt.Kalapati Venkatamma v. The Tahsildhar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Kalapati Venkatamma v. The Tahsildhar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Chittoor District

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. Sahara Travels, Rep. by Smt. Kaneez Fathima, Vs The Secretary, State Transport Authority

Narsamma, Vs The Collector and Executive Director

D.Kuramaiah Goud, s/o Kistaiah Goud, Vs The Executive Director (Collector)

Uttamraj Narmada Devi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammad Firoz Vs The Tahsildar, Atloor Mandal, Kadapa District.

Gali Ayyanna , Gali Ayyanna Naidu Vs The Tahsildar, Obulavaripalli