Writ petition filed by land owners challenging eviction notice issued by Tahsildar. Court dismissed the petition, rejecting the claim that immediate eviction steps were taken without waiting for the explanation period granted via the notice.
None; petition dismissed, no order as to costs.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.876 of 2011
ORDER:
The case of the petitioners is that the father of petitioners 1 to 6 purchased land to the extent of Acs.0.05 cents (dry) in Survey No.234/1 of Ekarlapalli Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District and after the death of their father petitioners 1 to 6 have become the absolute owners of the said land. Petitioner Nos.7 and 8 claim to be the owners of the land in an extent of Ac.0.03 cents each situated in the above said survey number having purchased the same under registered sale deeds dated 04.02.2002 and 26.07.2003 respectively.
The grievance of the petitioners is that the first respondentTahsildar, Kuppam Mandal has issued notice to them calling for explanation as to why they should not be evicted from the land in question.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even though 15 days time was granted to the petitioners to submit their explanation to the notice, without waiting for such time, the respondents are taking active steps to remove the structures of the petitioners from the land in question.
Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that no interference has been called for by any of the respondents and that in case the petitioners are to be evicted from the land in question due process of law would be followed and in this regard a notice has already been issued to the petitioners.
In view of the fact that the respondents are following due process of law and inasmuch as a notice to that effect has already been issued to the petitioners, the contention of the petitioners that the respondents are trying to forcibly evict them from the land in
question cannot be accepted.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be
no order as to costs.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J
Date: 25.01.2011 va
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitioners were entitled to a stay on eviction proceedings without waiting for the expiry of the notice period granted for explanation.
Whether the complaint of impending forced eviction was admissible when a legal notice had already been issued.
Petitioners
Tahsildar, Kuppam Mandal
Ashutosh Mohunta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
