Dismissed

Thummalapenta Radha Krishnayya v. Govt. of A.P

Telangana HC4 Dec 2013WP/31184/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court examined a writ petition challenging the proposed assignment of land serving as an ingress and egress pathway for villagers. After the Government Pleader confirmed no proposal existed due to the land's community use, the petition was disposed without further adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and MP No.38736 of 2013 disposed of with no further adjudication needed.

Thummalapenta Radha Krishnayya Vs Govt. of A.P — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.31184 of 2013

¶2

Dated 0 4 th December, 2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Thummalapenta Radha Krishnayya

¶5

…Petitioner

¶6

And

¶7

Govt.of A.P., rep.by the District Collector, SPSR Nellore District and others

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Harinath Reddy S.

¶10

Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: AGP for Revenue

¶11

The Court made the following:

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

This writ petition is filed on apprehension that respondent Nos.1 and 2 may assign land to an extent of Ac.0.56 cents in Survey No.156/1 of Parlapalli Village, Vidavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District in favour of respondent No.3.

¶14

It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the lands admeasuring Ac.0.86 cents in Survey No.157/2A, Acs.5.75 cents in Survey No.30 and Acs.3.36 cents in Survey No.31 of Parlapalli Village, Vidavaluru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, that adjacent to the said lands, land to an extent of Acs.2.15 cents classified as kalva poramboke is being used as a donka for ingress and egress to reach the lands of the villagers, including the petitioner and that at present, an extent of Ac.0.56 cents is left for the said purpose. The petitioner alleged that respondent No.3 has approached respondent No.2 for assignment of the said land and that yielding to the influence of respondent No.3, respondent No.2 is proposing to assign the said land

¶15

to him, thereby denying access to the lands of the petitioner and other villagers.

¶16

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Assignment), on instructions, submitted that originally Survey No.156/1 comprised Acs.2.06 cents, out of which an extent of Ac.1.10 cents was assigned to one T.Bhagya; Ac.0.57 cents is under encroachment of some of the villagers and the balance Ac.0.56 cents is being used as ingress and egress to the agricultural lands of the villagers, including the petitioner. That as the said land is being used for community purpose, namely, pathway for the villagers to reach their agricultural fields, there is no proposal for assignment of this land to anyone, including to respondent No.3.

¶17

In view of the above submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, which are placed on record, no further adjudication of this writ petition is needed and the same is accordingly disposed of.

¶18

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.38736 of 2013 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶19

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶20

04^th December, 2013 V GB

Thummalapenta Radha Krishnayya v. Govt. of A.P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thummalapenta Radha Krishnayya v. Govt. of A.P

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

Smt.a. Padmamma, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Potteli Narayana,S/o.Potteli Chengaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Gori Sultan S/o Gori Abdul Razaak Vs The Chief Executive Officer

Nidamarthy Siva Prasad Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Gudisa Srinivasa Rao, Vs The Government of A.P.

Arava Venkateswara Rao, Vs The Sub-Divisional Magistrate/ Sub-Collector