Allowed

The Madhavaram Gram panchayat, rep.by its Sarpanch v. The District Collector, Collectorate office, Kurnool

Telangana HC17 Apr 2008WP/8364/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 challenged the non-action taken by revenue authorities on a representation regarding illegal construction on Government land. Both parties agreed to the petition's disposal with directions.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.1 to consider the representation dated 26.03.2008, issue notices, and pass appropriate orders for removal of illegal constructions.

The Madhavaram Gram panchayat, rep.by its… — Environment and Pollution | Telangana HC (2008)

¶1

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

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 8364 of 2008

¶5

Between:

¶6

The Madhavaram Gram panchayat, rep.by its Sarpanch Smt.N.Lakshmi, W/o.N.Rami Reddy

¶7

R/o.Madhavaram village Manthrayalam Mandal, Kurnool District ..... PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

1 The District Collector, Collectorate office, Kurnool Kurnool District

¶10

2 The Revenue Divisional officer,Adoni,Kurnool District

¶11

3 The Tahsildar, Manthralayam Mandal Kurnool District

¶12

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶13

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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 26.3.2008 to take action against the assignees who are making illegal, construction activity in Government poramboke inSy.Nos.48/2 and 55/2 (B) situate in Madhavaram village, Manthralayam Mandal,Kurnool District as being illegal,arbitrary unconstitutional and consequentialy direct the respondents to take immediate necessary action to desist from the unauthorised and illegal, construction activities in SY.nos.48/2 and 55/2 (B) and to grant the Government Poramboke land to the Gram panchayat for providing the basic amenities to the public at large of Madhavaram village, Manthralayam Mandal, Kurnool District and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon`ble court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner:MS.DEVINENI RADHA RANI

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE

¶16

The Court made the following :

¶17

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA

¶18

Writ Petition No. 8364 of 2008

¶19

Order:

¶20

The petitioner, who is Sarpanch of Madhavaram Gram Panchayat, states that he made a representation dated 26.03.2008 requesting the respondents to take action against the illegal constructions being made by some persons in the Government land situated in Survey Nos.48/2 and 55/2 (B) of Madhavaram village, Manthralayam Mandal, Kurnool District, and it is his grievance that till date no action thereon had been taken by the respondents. Hence, he prays for appropriate directions.

¶21

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

¶22

The respondents, particularly respondent No.1, namely the District Collector, Kurnool District, are directed to consider and dispose of the representation dated 26.03.2008 of the petitioner, after issuing notices to the parties concerned, and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law and take necessary action for removal of the illegal constructions being made in the land in question.

¶23

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

¶24

___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J.

¶25

Date: 17.04.2008 Ksr/Nsr

The Madhavaram Gram panchayat, rep.by its Sarpanch v. The District Collector, Collectorate office, Kurnool

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Madhavaram Gram panchayat, rep.by its Sarpanch v. The District Collector, Collectorate office, Kurnool

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

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.

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

Muzafar Azamul Quadri, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Donga Naga Satyanarayana, Satyanarayana Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Uppalapati Sunila Vs The Special Officer, Urban Land Ceilings