Dismissed

Gorla Sailaja, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC13 Sept 2013WP/22054/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging respondents' inaction in disposing of a land regularisation application was dismissed as premature due to the pendency of another writ petition questioning the land entitlement involved. Relief for interim disposal was also rejected.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus to declare inaction illegal was denied; interim relief petition disposed of as infructuous.

Gorla Sailaja, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.22054 of 2013

¶2

Date : 13-9-2013

¶3

Between: Gorla Sailaja .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (ULC-1) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and another .. Respondents

¶4

Counsel for petitioner : Sri R. Raghunandan Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

¶5

The Court made the following :

¶6

ORDER:

¶7

This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in disposing of the petitioner’s application made in terms of G.O.Ms.No.455, Revenue Department, dated 29-7-2002, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶8

At the hearing, it is represented by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) that W.P.No.18768/2011 filed by M/s. Kameshwari Mutually Aided Co-operative Housing Society Limited, is pending in this Court wherein the said society has questioned the urban land ceiling proceedings in respect of larger extent of land, including the land in respect of which the petitioner made her application for regularisation.

¶9

The above submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader has not been controverted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

In view of the pendency of W.P.No.18768/2011 wherein the entitlement of the petitioner-society therein for

¶11

the land of which the land claimed by the petitioner herein forms part is in question, it will not be possible for the respondents to consider the latter’s application for regularisation. Therefore, no mandamus can be issued to the respondents at this stage till disposal of the said Writ Petition and the order passed therein reaches finality. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed without expressing any opinion on the right of the petitioner for regularisation with liberty to her to approach the respondents for taking a decision on her application for regularisation of her land after disposal of the above mentioned Writ Petition and avail a fresh remedy in the event such request is not considered. As a sequel to the dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.27021/2013 filed for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.

¶12

________________________ Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy

¶13

Date : 13-9-2013

¶14

Gorla Sailaja, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorla Sailaja, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

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

K.J.Natrajan Vs Sub Collector

Kanumuri Bharathi W/o Krishnam Raju, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chittboina Hari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its District Collector

N. Venkata Ramana Reddy. Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh.

D. Srinivas, Vs The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Pulichinthala Bal Reddy, S/o. Chandra Reddy (Late), Vs The Dist Collector Nalgonda Dist. at Nalgonda