G.Venu Gopal Rao v. The District Collector and Magistrate (Joint Collector)

Telangana HC9 Jul 2009WP/3643/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh issued an order under Article 226 directing the District Collector to expeditiously dispose of a pending revision petition and interim application filed by petitioners under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, within two weeks due to undue delay.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the pending application for interim relief along with the revision dated 2-2-2009 filed under Section 9 of the 1971 Act within two weeks.

G.Venu Gopal Rao Vs The District Collector and Magistrate… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

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

¶2

THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO : 3643 of 2009

¶6

Between:

¶7

1 G.Venu Gopal Rao S/o.Late Damodhar Rao

¶8

R/o.Katkur Village Bheemadevarapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶9

2 G.Ram Chander Rao S/o.Late Damodhar Rao

¶10

R/o.Katkur Village Bheemadevarapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶11

3 G.Ashok Rao S/o.Late Damodhar Rao

¶12

R/o.Katkur Village Bheemadevarapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶13

4 G.Akkanna Rao S/o.Late Damodhar Rao

¶14

R/o.Katkur Village Bheemadevarapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶15

5 G.Madhava Rao S/o.Late Damodhar Rao

¶16

R/o.Katkur Village Bheemadevarapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER(S)

¶17

AND

¶18

1 The District Collector & Magistrate (Joint Collector) Karimnagar District, Karimnagar.

¶19

2 The Special Deputy Collector (LASRSP FFC) Unit-1, LMD Colony, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District.

¶20

3 Paladugula Kumara Swamy S/o.Late P.Raghavulu

¶21

R/o.Katkur Village, Bheemadevarapally Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶22

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶23

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 appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in not considering to pass any order in Stay Petition pending disposal of Revision Petition being D/782/2009 is arbitrary and illegal and a direction may be issued to pass an order pending disposal of Revision Petition and pass.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAMA RAO

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE

¶26

The Court made the following :

¶27

ORAL ORDER:

¶28

The singular grievance in this writ petition is that the 1^st respondent has not disposed of either the substantive revision preferred by the petitioners under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘the 1971 Act’) or his application for interim stay of the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 12-1-2009 against which the revision is preferred, despite the revision having been preferred on 2-2-2009 and in the context of the fact that the 2^nd respondent Special Deputy Collector (LASRSP FFC) is proceeding to pay compensation to the 3^rd respondent for the lands acquired, of which there is a dispute whether the petitioners or the 3^rd respondent are the owners thereof.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 and 2 and Mrs. P.Aruna for the 3^rd respondent.

¶30

It is incumbent on the 1^st respondent to consider and dispose of the Revision or the interim application within a reasonable time. As the petitioners state to have filed the revision on 2-2-2009 along with an application for interim relief therein, the 1^st respondent should expeditiously consider either disposing of the main revision or the application for interim relief without undue procrastination.

¶31

In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to expeditiously and in any event within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, consider and dispose of the application filed by the petitioners for interim relief along with the revision dated 2-2-2009 filed under Section 9 of the 1971 Act. No costs.

¶32

________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J

¶33

9^th July, 2009. GRR

G.Venu Gopal Rao v. The District Collector and Magistrate (Joint Collector)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Venu Gopal Rao v. The District Collector and Magistrate (Joint 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

Suda Rama Bhadra Purushottam Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Thota Sobhanadri Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

Sivalikam Bala Krishnaiah Vs The District Collector Nellore

Tappeta Santhamma, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

T.R.Thyagarajan Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary

G. Dayanand, Vs The District Registrar, Hyderabad District having its Office