Disposed

Penta Reddy Bal Reddy, aged about 69 years, v. The State of Telangana, Represented by

Telangana HC1 Jul 2014WP/17644/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition filed to direct the appellate authority to expedite the disposition of an appeal against a mutation order, mandating a hearing on interlocutory applications within a week.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to take up the appeal and interlocutory application and pass appropriate orders within a week.

Penta Reddy Bal Reddy, aged about 69 years, Vs The State… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

The Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar

¶2

Writ Petition No.17644 of 2014

¶3

Dated 01.07.2014

¶4

Order:

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to take up the appeal filed by the petitioner and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible and in the meanwhile, direct respondent No.3 not to effect mutation in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5 in respect of the lands, which are subject matter thereof.

¶6

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.NVR.Amarnath, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶7

As per the direction issued by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.840 of 2010, dated 15-02-2011, which was further reiterated by this Court in W.P.No.9032 of 2014, dated 25-03-2014, respondent No.3 herein has conducted enquiry and passed final order vide Proceeding No.B/3395/2011, dated 05-05-2014,

¶8

by virtue of which mutation of revenue records in favour of respondent No.4 in respect of the lands in dispute has been ordered. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed appeal No.A/1276 of 2014 on 31-05-2014 before respondent No.2 along with an application for interim relief.

¶9

The grievance of the petitioner is that while respondent No.2 is yet to take up the said appeal and the interlocutory application for consideration, the order of respondent No.3 impugned therein, was being given effect to by effecting mutation in the revenue records. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the appeal filed by him.

¶10

Sri N.V.R.Amarnath, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5, stated that though he has not received any notice in the appeal filed by the petitioner before respondent No.2, having appeared in this Writ Petition, he came to know of the said appeal. A notice in the said appeal to him stands waived as he undertakes to appear before the appellate authority in the said appeal. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of

¶11

directing respondent No.2 to take up the appeal along with interlocutory application and after hearing both sides, pass appropriate orders on the interlocutory application within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶12

Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶13

_____________________ (Vilas V. Afzulpurkar, J) Date: 1^st July, 2014

¶14

Note: CC in one week. B/o lur

Penta Reddy Bal Reddy, aged about 69 years, v. The State of Telangana, Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Penta Reddy Bal Reddy, aged about 69 years, v. The State of Telangana, Represented by

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

T.Munemma W/o T.Guravareddy Vs The Government of A.P.

A.Drakshaveni Vs The Government of A.P. rep by its Prl. Secretary

Velamuri Satyanarayana Reddy S/o Chalama Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Radha Realty Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration

Komarraju Rajeshwar Rao Vs Government of Telangana

Kawalkar Pentu, Vs The State of Telangana