Disposed

Padamati Subhas Chandra Bose Babu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC27 Aug 2012PIL/273/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the failure to safeguard a play ground earmarked at Zilla Parishad High School, alleging illegal encroachment. Noting that alternative sites were being offered to encroachers and that the structures were temporary, the court expressed surprise but issued a direction for the removal of encroachments within six weeks. PIL disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondent authorities to remove the encroachments within a period of six weeks from the date of the order.

Padamati Subhas Chandra Bose Babu Vs… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶2

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.273 OF 2012

¶3

DATED:27.8.2012

¶4

Between: Padamati Subhas Chandra Bose Babu And The Government of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education (EC-2) Department, Hyderabad and others.

¶5

… Petitioner

¶6

…. Respondents

¶7

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND

¶8

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶9

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.273 of 2012

¶10

Order: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose)

¶11

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties in the matter. The petitioner filed the present petition seeking to declare the action of the respondent Nos. 1 to 7 in not safeguarding the play ground in an extent of Acs.3.00 situated in Survey No. 74 of Zilla Parishad High School, Rajampalem, near Dondapudi Village as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Education Act, 1982.

¶12

The main grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that the land in question, which is ear-marked for a play ground is being encroached upon.

¶13

A counter affidavit has been filed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddigudem, the 5^th respondent herein stating that on 10.7.2012, some encroachers tried to encroach the land in question by erecting wooden poles. But, such structures are not permanent in nature. It is further stated that during the negotiations, which have been held by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Mandal Revenue Officer with the Ryoth Coolie Sangham leaders and the encroachers, it was resolved that the encroachers will be provided with alternative

¶14

house sites by acquiring suitable land and the encroachers have also agreed to evict the encroached land. They have also stated that they will not enter into the land in question and voluntarily agreed to remove the wooden poles, which were erected in the play ground.

¶15

On a perusal of the averments made in the counter affidavit, it appears to us that it is very easy to have a land by way of encroachment and the encroachers are also provided with alternative house sites by acquiring suitable lands. If such is the situation, we are astonished and surprised how the rights of the parties can be protected. However, if such is the state of affairs, we cannot issue any further directions in the matter except to direct the respondentauthorities to remove the encroachments within a period of six weeks from today.

¶16

The Public Interest Litigation is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

__________________________ PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ

¶18

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J

¶19

27-8-2012 pnb

Padamati Subhas Chandra Bose Babu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padamati Subhas Chandra Bose Babu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

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

Kotiparthuni Vishwanatham Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Pydi Balaraju, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

P. Janardhan, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Raghunandan Yadav Vs The Principal Secretary to the Government

Chakka Uma Maheswara Rao Vs The District Collector

C.J.Karira, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

E. Ram Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Principal Secretary

C.J. Karira Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mudigonda Durga Prasad, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Kamala Bar and Restaurant, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Campaign for Housing and Tenural Rights (Chatri) Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Asn.Iv)

Forum for a Better Hyderabad,rep.byi ts Secretary Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal

G. Bala Raju, Vs The Government of A.P.

The Secretary Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Childrens Park Vs The District Collector