Allowed

M. Appa Rao, v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC4 Sept 2013WP/20022/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an order rejecting a land regularisation application because the Collector lacked jurisdiction for land exceeding 250 sq. yards. The petition was allowed, and the application was directed to be forwarded to the competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of rejection by Collector set aside; application directed to be forwarded to respondent No.7 for consideration by Chief Commissioner within one month.

M. Appa Rao, Vs The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20022 of 2013

¶3

Date:04.09.2013

¶4

Between: M. Appa Rao .. Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by the Principal Secretary, Revenue (Assignments), Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents

¶5

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 : AGP for Revenue

¶6

The Court made the following:

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

This writ petition is filed feeling aggrieved by proceedings in Rc.No.2006/2013/E-1, dated 24.06.2013, of respondent No.3 whereby he has rejected the petitioner’s application for regularisation of 345 sq. yards of land in Survey No.6/6 Part of Pulagalipalem Village, Pendurti Mandal, Ward No.71 of Visakhapatnam District, under G.O.Ms.No.166, Revenue (Assn.POT) Department, dated 16.02.2008.

¶9

Besides raising several pleas on merits, the petitioner has pleaded that the impugned order of rejection passed by respondent No.3 is without jurisdiction. The petitioner pleaded that under paragraph No.9(ii) of G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008, the applications for transfer of rights above 250 sq. yards shall be sent by the Collector and those proposals shall be considered under the Chairmanship of the Chief Commissioner, Land Administration.

¶10

On a perusal of the said paragraph in the G.O., this Court is convinced that it is only the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, who is competent to consider the petitioner’s application for regularisation, as the extent of the land in respect of which the petitioner sought for regularisation is 345 sq. yards.

¶11

On this short ground alone, the impugned order is set aside. Respondent No.3 is directed to forward the petitioner’s application to respondent No.7 within one month from the date of

¶12

receipt of this order. Within two months of receipt of the application from respondent No.3, respondent No.7 shall consider the same, take a decision in terms of G.O.Ms.No.166, dated 16.02.2008, and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶13

The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶14

As a sequel, W.P.M.P.No.24542 of 2013 filed for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶15

____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J. 04.09.2013 KH

M. Appa Rao, v. The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Appa Rao, v. The Govt. 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

Mulka Laxmibai Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Sikilammetla Sathyanarayana , Sathaiah Vs The Tahsildar, Narayanpur Mandal, Nalgonda District.

Soka Padmamma W/o Penchalaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by

Smt. Battula Usha Rani, Vs The District Collector

K.Shankaraiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Its Secretary

Smt. Ayesha Abid Ali, Vs The Tahasildar