Disposed

M. Ravi Kumar, v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal

Telangana HC2 Sept 2013PIL/401/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil public interest litigation challenging the accuracy of encumbrance certificates issued by the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Department. The High Court declined to directly issue a mandamus but directed the Commissioner to investigate the complaints and report within six weeks before taking further steps.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to enquire into complaints and report within six weeks.

M. Ravi Kumar, Vs The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶3

P.I.L.No.401 of 2013

¶4

Date: 02.09.2013

¶5

Between:

¶6

M.Ravi Kumar and another

¶7

.....Petitioners

¶8

AND

¶9

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Registrations), Hyderabad and others.

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶12

P.I.L.No.401 of 2013

¶13

ORDER: (per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta )

¶14

By this petition, the petitioners have ventilated their grievance that the respondents are not issuing accurate and correct encumbrance certificates in the State of Andhra Pradesh in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 and further a direction has been sought for to the respondents for taking necessary steps to ensure that respondents 2 and 3 and their service providers are equipped with adequate technology and software required to provide accurate and complete encumbrance certificates.

¶15

It appears that the petitioners have approached without making any demand of justice for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus. Under these circumstances, we feel that at present respondent No.2 should be activated. Accordingly, we direct respondent No.2 (Commissioner and Inspector General, Registration and Stamps, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad), to enquire into the complaint made in this writ petition and upon enquiry, if he finds that the complaint of the petitioners is true and correct, he shall take effective and appropriate steps forthwith. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a

¶16

copy of this order.

¶17

With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶18

___________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ

¶19

_______________ K.C.BHANU, J

¶20

02.09.2013 Gsn

M. Ravi Kumar, v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Ravi Kumar, v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal

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

Velanati Madhava Rao, S/o Jayaram, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Save Earth Society, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Valavala Suryanarayana, Vs The Union of India, Rep by its Secretary

Srivatsav Sunkara S/o Gandhi Sunkara, Vs The Govt of Andhra Pradesh

Karumanchi Prasanna Kumar Vs The Election Commissioner

Biyyala Venkata Papa Rao Vs Government of A.P.

M/s. Forum for Rule of Law Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Padmanabhaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh