Disposed

Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC22 Jul 2014WP/19728/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by an archaka against the State for inaction against encroachers on temple land. The State did not approach police. Writ petition disposed of with liberty to approach the Executive Officer.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; liberty to approach the Executive Officer of the temple for necessary relief; fourth respondent to act on any requisition in accordance with law.

Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.19728 OF 2014

¶3

Date: 22.07.2014

¶4

Between:- Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu, Guntur District. And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others This Court made the following:-

¶5

… Petitioner

¶6

... Respondents

¶7

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.19728 OF 2014

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home.

¶10

2. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition complaining inaction of the respondents against the encroachers, who are attempting to enter into the lands belonging to Sri Venu Gopala Swamy Temple, Mettagudipadu Village, Rentichintala Mandal, Guntur District.

¶11

3. The petitioner is an archaka of the said temple. He states that the temple is having Ac.40.00 cents of land in R.S.Nos.87, 109, 168, 230, 274 and 439 of Mettagudipadu Village, Rentichintala Mandal, Guntur District. In the second week of May, 2014, the encroachers tried to interfere with the land and plough it. When the petitioner and

¶12

his brother with the help of villagers resisted the said action, the encroachers left the place. Hence, he made representations to respondents 4 and 2 on 23.05.2014 and 08.07.2014 respectively. But, no action has been taken on the said representations so far. Hence, this writ petition.

¶13

4. The learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, states that the Executive Officer of the temple has not approached the police station concerned with request to protect the endowment property from the encroachers.

¶14

5. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the Executive Officer of the temple for necessary relief. If the Executive Officer of the temple makes any requisition, the fourth respondent shall take appropriate action thereon in accordance with law. The Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: 22.07.2014 Note: Furnish CC in three days B/O va

¶16

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶17

WRIT PETITION No.19728 OF 2014

¶18

Date: 22.07.2014 Note: Furnish CC in three days va

Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu 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

Khalid Basuleman Vs The State of Telangana

Sriramula Raju Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its

A.Laxmana Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary

S. Akbar Basha, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue Department

K.Shankara Reddy Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

B. Sri Ramulu, Vs Government of Telangana