Allowed

Gummadidala Venakateswarlu v. The District Collector

Telangana HC11 Oct 2013WP/26338/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court held that respondents were unjustified in remaining inactive after a decision to grant house sites to the pottery community. Directions were issued to allot house sites within three months, and the interim relief petition was disposed of as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to allot house sites to eligible pottery community members within three months of order receipt.

Gummadidala Venakateswarlu Vs The District… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26338 of 2013

¶2

Date: 11.10.2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Gummadidala Venkateswarlu

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

and The District Collector, Ongole and others Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ravinuthala Gopi Mohan Counsel for respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in allotting house site to the petitioner after deleting the extent of Acs.2.11 cents of land in survey No.173 of Chimakurthy Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, from the prohibitory order book as illegal and arbitrary.

¶10

The petitioner pleaded that the abovementioned land is being used for pottery works, that when the petitioner and other villagers approached respondent No.1 for assignment of the said land as house sites, the latter has called for a report from respondent Nos.2 and 3, based on which, it has issued proceedings dated 30.01.2009 ordering deletion of the said land from the prohibitory order book and directed allotment of the same as house sites to the persons belonging to kummari caste (pottery community) after conversion of it from topu poranboke to village site poramboke. The petitioner further stated that representations dated 05.08.2013 and 12.08.2013 were made to the respondents for giving effect to the abovementioned proceedings of respondent No.1. As no steps were taken for implementation of the said proceedings of respondent No.1, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶11

This Court has adjourned the case on 10.09.2013 to enable the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignments) to get instructions. Today, he is not present at the hearing.

¶12

On consideration of the facts of this case as referred to above, I am of the opinion that there is no justification for the respondents in remaining quiet even after a decision was taken by respondent No.1 for changing the classification of the land and granting it as house sites to the people belonging to the pottery community.

¶13

Therefore, the respondents are directed to consider the request of the petitioner and other similarly situated persons and take

¶14

appropriate steps for implementation of the proceedings dated 30.01.2009 of respondent No.1 for granting house site pattas to the eligible people belonging to the pottery community after conversion of the land from topu poramboke to village site poramboke. The respondents shall complete this exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶16

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.32568 of 2013 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶17

_____________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶18

11^th October, 2013 GHN

Gummadidala Venakateswarlu v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gummadidala Venakateswarlu v. The District Collector

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

Jalla Sudershan Reddy,S/o.Reddappa Reddy Vs The Tahasildar,C.D.Dinne Mandal, Ysr Cuddapah District

G.Vasanth Reddy S/o. G.Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

P.Vinaya Kumar, S/o Ranga Rao Vs The Andhra Pradesh Information Commission

Thathina Boina Chinna Ramaiah , Ramaiah Vs The District Collector, Y.S.R. Kadapa District, Kadapa.

A.Ramanaiah, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Gutti Sayappa, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh