Appeals filed against a direction by the Single Judge to redeliver land possession to petitioners were dismissed as not maintainable. The Court held that the joint order could not be bifurcated to address only the possession aspect, thus declining to interfere.
Appeals disposed of as not maintainable. No 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 THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
Writ Appeal Nos. 625 of 2011 and 1416 of 2012
DATED:16.11.2012
Between: Bande Siva Saankara Srinivasa Satya Sai Prasad
… Appellant
And
Saripella Srinivasa Raju and others.
…. Respondents
THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
Writ Appeal Nos. 625 of 2011 and 1416 of 2012
Common Judgment: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose)
These two appeals are directed against the order dated 25.2.2011 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos. 3455 of 2006 and 18998 of 2008.
The aforementioned writ petitions are filed by the unofficial respondents herein, assailing the order dated 3.2.2006 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District and the notice dated 2.2.2006 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer in relation to L.C.C. No. 1684/K/75, dated 2.2.2006 on the file of the Court of the Land Reforms Tribunal-cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada as illegal and void. A consequential direction was also sought to direct the respondent-authorities to desist from taking action against the writ petitioners.
Having heard the learned counsel on either side and having perused the material on record, the Hon’ble Single Judge disposed of the aforementioned writ petitions along with C.R.P. No. 710 of 2006 by
a common order dated 25.2.2011. By the said order, the Hon’ble Single judge while setting aside the orders impugned therein, remitted the matter back to the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kakinada for fresh enquiry after giving notice and opportunity to both the sides. The Hon’ble Single Judge further directed the Tribunal to redeliver possession of the lands in question to the unofficial respondents/writ petitioners within a period of six months from that date.
The appellant filed these appeals being aggrieved by that part of the order through which the Hon’ble Single Judge directed the Tribunal to redeliver possession to the unofficial respondents/writ petitioners. However, the appellant did not file any appeal against the order passed in C.R.P. No. 710 of 2006.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is aggrieved only by that part of the order passed in the writ petitions, impugned in these writ appeals and he has no grievance against the order passed in C.R.P. No. 710 of 2006.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the impugned order of the Hon’ble Single Judge, we are of the view that it is not possible for this Court to bifurcate the order of the Hon’ble Single Judge, which is a common order, which is said to have been passed in the writ petitions and C.R.P. No. 710 of 2006 and deal with the appeals independently, which are filed against the order passed in writ petitions.
Therefore, in our opinion, we cannot pass any order on these appeals. Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the order of the Hon’ble Single Judge and dispose of these appeals as not maintainable. No costs.
__________________________ PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ
______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J 16-11-2012
pnb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can bifurcate the impugned order to dispose of the appeals against the direction for redelivery of possession independently of the C.R.P.
Bande Siva Saankara Srinivasa Satya Sai Prasad
Saripella Srinivasa Raju
Pinaki Chandra Ghose
Vilas V. Afzulpurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
