Disposed

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah v. The District Collector

Telangana HC10 Feb 2011WP/23947/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for forming of a road. Court held writ cannot contravene civil court order. Petitioners to implead in civil suit for easement by necessity. Government directed to take steps for revision or appeal.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed. Petitioners directed to implead in civil suit and seek vacation of injunction or easement. Respondents directed to take action per civil court directions; Government to file revisio

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY

¶2

W.P.No.23947 of 2002

¶3

Dated: 10-02-2011

¶4

Between:

¶5

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah & another

¶6

…Petitioners

¶7

AND

¶8

The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor District & Others.

¶9

Respondents

¶10

This Court made the following:

¶11

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY

¶12

W.P.No.23947 of 2002

¶13

ORDER:

¶14

The petitioners, villagers of Gattu Kotha Indlu H/o. Gattu Village filed this writ petition stating that in the said village there are 80 houses and they made several representations to the respondents for formation of road from Gattu village to Gattu Vadde Indlu and basing on the said representations, the third respondent conducted an enquiry and completed the same on 7.6.2002 and decided to lay the road and road stones were also laid for formation of the road. Meanwhile, one Vara Laxmi, resident of Gattu village filed a suit in O.S.No.135 of 2002 against the Gattu Vadde Indlu villagers and one Desamma and Anjanamma filed a suit in O.S.No.136 of 2002 represented by Gattu Vadde Indlu, to which, the petitioners are not parties. The said persons obtained injunction restraining the respondents from laying the road. In view of the same, the respondents are under obligation to acquire the laid for formation of road and lay the road.

¶15

In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated that on the representation submitted by the residents of Gattu Vadde Indlu for formation of road from Gattu Village to Gattu Vadde Indlu, the matter was enquired into, Grama Sabhas were conducted involving elders of the villages and obtained the consent of the farmers to part with their patta land to form a road of 20 feet width and the compensation for the land was fixed at Rs.1280/- per cent i.e. Rs.1,28,000/- per acre and an advance of Rs.1,000/- to each farmer was also paid and survey and peg making was also done and maximum road work was also completed. At that stage, due to the local differences, Smt. G.Vala Laxmi filed a suit in O.S.No.135 of 2002 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur and obtained a

¶16

direction to restore status quo ante and for cost of Rs.5,000/- in I.A.No.893 of 2002 in I.A.No.510 of 2002 in the said suit on 15.11.2002. The implead petition filed by the Government was rejected on 14.11.2002. It is stated that there is no requisition from Gram Panchayat or Mandal Parishad or Zilla Parishad or District Panchayat Office nor any funds are placed for acquiring of land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. However, it is stated that efforts are being made to provide the road through private mediation between two villages to facilitate the road to petitioners’ habitation. Since there is a restraint order passed by the civil Court in I.A.No.893 of 2002 in I.A.No.510 of 2002 in O.S.No.135 of 2002, further proceedings could not be initiated and the road could not be laid.

¶17

It is well-settled that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to contravene the lawful orders passed by the Civil Court. Since the civil suit is already pending before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Puttur, the petitioners are at liberty to implead in the said suit and seek easement by necessity for laying the road and can seek for vacation of the injunction order. As the I.A. filed by the Government to implead in the suit has already been rejected, it is for the Government to take appropriate steps by filing either a revision or appeal. Pursuant to the directions to be issued by the civil Court, the respondents are directed to take further action in the matter.

¶18

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶19

________________

¶20

A. GOPAL REDDY, J.

¶21

FEBRUARY 10, 2011 Tsr.

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gadde Muthu Pullaiah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kodaraju Ramachandra Rao Vs Gadde Umamaheswara Rao

Neellisetty Sri Lakshmi Vs Tulluri Chit Funds (Pvt) Ltd.

Chintakayala Masenayya, Vs Pajjuri Sriravamma

syed Anweruddin Vs The district Collector

Syed Basha Saheb Vs The Chief Commissioner of Land Admn.

B.Raja Komuraiah Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer