Disposed

Durgapu Anantaiah, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC5 Nov 2013WP/31591/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the petitioner must approach the competent civil Court under Section 8(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, for title declaration. Upon succeeding, the petitioner can seek correction of revenue record entries. The writ petition was disposed of subject to this liberty.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of subject to liberty to approach the civil court for title declaration under Section 8(2) of AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971.

Durgapu Anantaiah, Vs The State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.31591 of 2013

¶3

Date:05.11.2013

¶4

Between:

¶5

Durgapu Anantaiah, S/o Late Gandaiah And eight others.

¶6

..... Petitioners

¶7

And:

¶8

The State of A.P., Reptd by District Collector, Ranga Reddy District and two others.

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Venugopal Rao Pasnooru Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Revenue

¶11

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶12

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside letter No.A/343/13, dated 06.07.2013, of respondent No.3, whereby he has declined to correct the entries in the record of rights in respect of lands admeasuring Acs.3.01 guntas in Survey No.261, Acs.6.00 guntas in Survey No.262 and Ac.1.00 in Survey No.264 of Shankerpally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and issue pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect thereof to the petitioners (for short ‘the subject lands’).

¶13

It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that one Mohd. Mirza was the owner of the subject lands and that the petitioners’ ancestors were in possession of the said lands during their life time and thereafter, the petitioners

¶14

are in possession of the same. As the pahanies issued in respect of the subject lands showed National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) as the occupier of the said lands, the petitioners approached respondent No.3 for correction of the entries in the record of rights. As no action was taken thereon, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.16403 of 2012, which was disposed of by order, dated 06.06.2012, with a direction to respondent No.3 to consider the representation, dated 18.04.2012, of the petitioners and pass appropriate order thereon. Accordingly, respondent No.3 held an enquiry after notice to the petitioners and passed the impugned order, wherein he has stated that the land in Survey Nos.261 and 262 which belong to one Mohd. Mirza is a ceiling surplus land; that the said Mohd. Mirza surrendered the said lands along with other Survey numbers to the Government; that the same was assigned to certain other parties; that subsequently, the assignments were cancelled as the assignees have violated the conditions of assignments; and that after resumption of the land, a part of the same was given to NTPC and the balance land is retained by the Government. On the above reasons, respondent No.3 declined to accept the petitioners’ request for correction of the entries in the revenue records.

¶15

After hearing Sri Venugopal Rao Pasnooru, the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to approach the competent civil Court under Section 8(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971, by way of a civil suit. In the event of their succeeding in the civil suit, in getting their title declared to the subject lands, the petitioners can approach respondent No.3 for correction of the entries in the revenue records.

¶16

Subject to the liberty given to the petitioners as above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.39260 of 2013 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.

¶17

____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 05^th November, 2013 DR

Durgapu Anantaiah, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgapu Anantaiah, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Venakta Ramana Reddy, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Gonepally Anjaneyulu, Vs State of A.P.

Mukkamalla Venkateshwara Reddy, Vs The District Collector

Meer Javid Hussain, Vs The District Collector

Badesab Vs The Ap State Wakf Board

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Mission Vs The State of A.P.