Disposed

Chinde Veeraiah, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC4 Feb 2009WP/1899/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging eviction and lack of assignment consideration, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' cases if they proceed with land assignment in specified survey numbers, subject to eligibility, while noting no record of petitioners' possession.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioners' cases for land assignment in specified survey numbers if undertaking assignment, subject to eligibility.

Chinde Veeraiah, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1899 of 2009

¶5

Between:

¶6

Chinde Veeraiah, S/o. Venkataiah, R/o. Dharmavaram Village H/o. North Kondayapalem, Varikuntapadu Mandal, Sri Pottisreeramulu Nellore District and others.

¶7

..... PETITIONERS

¶8

AND

¶9

The District Collector, Nellore district and others.

¶10

.....RESPONDENTS

¶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 issue Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in trying to evict the petitioners without considering their applications for assignment in respect of lands detailed in Annexure "A" attached to the writ petition, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice apart from opposed to the BSO.NO.15 and consequently direct the respondents to consider the application of petitioners for assignment of lands detailed in Annexure-"A" on priority over 3rd parties.

¶12

Counsel for the Petitioners:MRKAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU

¶13

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶14

The Court made the following :

¶15

ORDER:

¶16

The petitioners claim to be in possession and enjoyment of about 2 to 2½ acres of Government land in various survey numbers of Dharmavaram Village H/o North Kondayapalem, Varikuntapadu Mandal, Nellore District. It is stated that, recognizing their possession,

¶17

the Village Secretary had issued adangals, and the proposals for granting pattas were processed to a substantial extent. Their grievance is that the respondents have not taken any action so far, and efforts are being made to assign the land to others.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

¶19

Though the petitioners assert that they are in possession and enjoyment of the land for the past several years, there is nothing on record to disclose the same. Be that as it may, in case, any Government land in the village is available for assignment to the eligible poor, the cases of the petitioners also need to be considered. If any of the persons are already in possession and enjoyment of the land, as evident from the records, the same needs to be taken into account, subject, however,

¶20

to their eligibility, on economic and social grounds.

¶21

The Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents that, in case they undertake assignment of Government land in Survey Nos.133, 135 to 137, 147, 148, 175, 176 and 214 to 216 of Dharmavaram, H/o North Kondayapalem, Varikuntapadu Mandal, Nellore District, the cases of the petitioners shall also be considered.

¶22

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶23

________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.04.02.2009. Note: Furnish C.C. in two days. (B/o) GJ

Chinde Veeraiah, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinde Veeraiah, 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

Mrs.Kiran Naidu Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its

Ahmedi Begum Vs The Tahsildar

The Marine Fishermen Cooperative Society Limited, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Karra Ravinder Reddy Vs The Tahsildar

M/s. Bijam Private Limited, 6-24-1, Opp. Visakha Museum Vs The Sub Registrar, Madhurawada

Mohd. Qamuruddin Khan, Vs The Joint Sub-Registrar-I