Dismissed

Sheri Bichi Reddy v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC1 Jun 2015WP/13894/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's application for a writ of prohibition against the appellate authority. The Court held that the appeal under the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 was not lacking jurisdiction and could consider the pendency of the civil suit as a contention on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner at liberty to raise contentions in the appeal; Appellate authority directed to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits expeditiously within two months.

Sheri Bichi Reddy Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

W.P.No.13894 of 2015

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard.

¶5

The relief sought for in the writ petition is in the nature of seeking a Writ of Prohibition against the 2^nd respondent, who is seized of Appeal bearing No.A/1728/2013 filed by the 4^th respondent. The petitioner states that he has already filed a suit in O.S.No.78 of 2013 before the Junior Civil Judge, Kodangal for declaration of ownership and for perpetual injunction and the 4^th respondent herein is the 3^rd defendant therein. He, therefore, claims that in view of pendency of the said suit, the proceedings under the ROR Act cannot be proceeded with and states that the appeal filed before the 2^nd respondent shall not be heard and disposed of pending the above suit. The petitioner also states that he has filed an application before the 2^nd respondent on 23-09-2014 for the aforesaid purpose. The present writ petition, therefore, is filed to declare the action of the 2^nd respondent in proceeding with the appeal as illegal.

¶6

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that a Writ in the nature of Prohibition as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted, as basing on the facts of the case it cannot be said that the appeal filed before the 2^nd respondent suffers from inherent lack of jurisdiction. On the contrary, the appeal was filed under Section 5(5) of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, 1971 and it is pending before the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner, however, is at liberty to raise all his contentions in the said appeal including the fact of filing the aforesaid civil suit and it is for the appellate authority to consider the same and then take appropriate decision in the appeal. The relief sought for by the petitioner, therefore, cannot be granted,

¶7

particularly as the 2^nd respondent appears to have already fixed the date of hearing of appeal on 30-08-2014 as is evident from the notice of hearing, dated 18-08-2014 (Ex.P-2) filed along with this writ petition.

¶8

The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after hearing both sides. No order as to costs.

¶9

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

¶10

VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J

¶11

Date: 01-06-2015

¶12

Prv

¶13

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶14

W.P.No.13894 of 2015

¶15

01-06-2015

Sheri Bichi Reddy v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheri Bichi Reddy v. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

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

Patan Liyakath Alikhan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Papai Narsamma W/o. Venkatesham, Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Mohammed Ali S/o Abdul Jabbar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.Katarapu Lakshmi, Vs Union of India

Kotagiri Manmadha Rao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its District Collector

K.Venkateswarlu S/o Pullaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh