Disposed

P.Satyavathi, v. The Additional Agent to the Government

Telangana HC23 Jul 2014WP/20160/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed to expedite a pending revision of an eviction appeal. The Court directed the Government to hear the interim application within four weeks and maintain status quo on the land.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.5 to consider the petitioner's revision and interim application within four weeks; status quo maintained.

P.Satyavathi, Vs The Additional Agent to the Government — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20160 of 2014

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

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

¶5

Petitioner suffered an order of eviction dated 30.08.2010 in L.T.R.P.No.133/2007, passed by the Agency Divisional Officer, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District. As against that, appeal filed by the petitioner, being C.M.A.No.8 of 2011 was dismissed by respondent No.1 by order, dated 31.10.2013. The petitioner has, therefore, questioned the said orders by approaching respondent No.5-Government, by filing a revision on 13.12.2013. The petitioner states that she has filed an application for interim relief also along with the appeal. However, the grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that neither the revision petition nor the application for stay is being taken up by respondent No.5 and meanwhile, the petitioner is likely to be dispossessed. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

¶6

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits on the basis of the instructions that the revision filed by the petitioner is pending with respondent No.5. He, however, submits that as per the report of the Mandal Revenue Inspector, the possession of the land was taken over on 05.07.2014 and is kept in the custody of the Village Revenue Officer, Indukur.

¶7

Since the revision petition of the petitioner is pending with respondent No.5, it is just and necessary that the said revision is taken up and appropriate orders are passed therein, at least, to the extent of interim relief sought for by the petitioner.

¶8

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.5 to consider the petitioner’s aforesaid revision petition and pass appropriate orders, at least in the interim application, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till the order aforesaid is passed by respondent No.5, status quo with regard to the land existing as on today shall be maintained and the same shall be subject to the orders that would be passed by respondent No.5 in terms of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶10

____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

¶11

Dt:23.07.2014

¶12

kdl

P.Satyavathi, v. The Additional Agent to the Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Satyavathi, v. The Additional Agent to the Government

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

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

K.Shankara Reddy Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Vaddamani Ramana Charyulu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Desala Narasimharaju, Vs The Additional Agent to the Government

G. Bhaskara Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Ramachandraiah Vs The State of A.P.