Disposed
Gudise Ganganna, v. The Thasildar
Telangana HCWP/27439/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 27439 OF…
What the court decided
AI extract
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 27439 OF…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
WRIT PETITION No. 27439 OF 2010.
DATED 21st March, 2011.
BETWEEN
Gudise Ganganna
And
The Tahsildar, Kalyandurg Mandal, Ananthapur Dist and anr
….Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
WRIT PETITION No. 27439 OF 2010.
ORDER:
The petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction to the first respondent to seize the bore-well dug by the second respondent in Sy.No. 121-2C of Palavai village within thirty meters of his bore well in Sy.No. 12-2A of the same village.
For the aforesaid relief, the petitioner has also submitted representation dated 4.9.2010 before the first respondent. It is stated that no decision has been taken on the said representation till date.
The learned Counsel for the second respondent, on the other hand, submits that it is the petitioner who has dug the bore-well after the bore-well dug by the second respondent
and hence, the petitioner cannot take advantage of his own wrong doing.
Having considered the submissions of the learned Counsel on either side and gone through the case file, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 4.9.2010, after hearing both sides and taking documentary evidence with regard to date of digging of bore-wells, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that while deciding the said representation, the first respondent shall issue prior notice to the second respondent to put-forth his case.
There shall be no order as to costs.
-JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
Dated 21st March, 2011. Msnro
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for seizure of the respondent's bore-well due to alleged encroachment.
Whether the authority was bound to take a decision on the petitioner's representation filed on 4.9.2010.
Gudise Ganganna
The Tahsildar, Kalyandurg Mandal, Ananthapur Dist
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court