Allowed

Koyalker Shanker, v. The District Panchyat Officer

Telangana HC12 Jul 2011WP/6998/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an order cancelling a layout due to settled disputes regarding respondent land. The court directed the petitioners to submit a revised layout to the Gram Panchayat within three months for approval in accordance with law, thereby disposing of the writ petitions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 24.03.2004 set aside; petitioners directed to submit revised layout to Gram Panchayat within 3 months.

Koyalker Shanker, Vs The District Panchyat… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION NOS.6662 AND 6998 OF 2004

¶3

DATED 1 2 TH JULY, 2011

¶4

BETWEEN Sunkari Gangu Bai and others. …Petitioners And District Panchayat Officer, Perkit Gram Panchayat, Armoor Mandal, Nizamabad District and others.

¶5

…Respondents

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NOS.6662 AND 6998 OF 2004

¶8

COMMON ORDER:

¶9

Challenge in these two writ petitions was to the order dated 24.03.2004 passed by the District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad, cancelling the layout in L.P.No.22/96 upon the complaint of Gattadi Gundu Gangadhar, the third respondent in both the writ petitions. It was the case of the third respondent that the layout was obtained including his land therein.

¶10

This Court, by order dated 12.04.2004, directed status quo obtaining as on that day with regard to the operation and effect of the impugned order to be maintained. Thereafter, by order dated 16.09.2004 the impugned order was suspended. These orders were passed in Writ Petition No.6998 of 2004.

¶11

It is now stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners in these two cases and the learned counsel for the third respondent that the disputes inter se with regard to the third respondent’s grievance have been settled through the Award dated 17.09.2009 in Lok Adalat Case No.477 of 2009 in O.S.No.10 of 2005 (on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Armoor), passed by the Lok Adalat, Armoor.

¶12

In that view of the matter, the objection raised by the third respondent which found favour with the District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad, while cancelling the layout under the impugned order dated 24.03.2004 no longer survives for consideration. It would however be necessary that a revised layout be submitted to the Gram Panchayat in keeping with the present ground position for necessary

¶13

approval in accordance with law. The impugned order dated 24.03.2004 passed by the District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad, is accordingly set aside. The petitioners shall see that a revised layout is submitted to the second respondent Gram Panchayat for approval within three (3) months. Thereupon, the Gram Panchayat shall pass necessary orders in the matter after following the due procedure and in accordance with law.

¶14

The Writ Petitions are disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs.

¶15

____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 12^TH JULY, 2011. VGSR

Koyalker Shanker, v. The District Panchyat Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koyalker Shanker, v. The District Panchyat Officer

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

Golla Lokeswaramma Vs The District Collector

Vendra Ganesh Mrutyunjaya Venkata Ramakrishnarao Vs The Joint Collector

Darsi Gram Panchayat Vs The Government of a.P., Rep. by its Principal

Krishna District Fair Price Shop Dealers Welfare Vs The Joint Collector, Krishna

M/s. Damayanthi Ice Factory, Vs Mr G Sai Prasad

Sunkari Gangubai, Vs District Panchayat Officer