Disposed

Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy v. The State of A.P.

Telangana HC17 Jul 2015WP/21768/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A two-paragraph order disposing of a writ petition where petitioners alleged illegal entry by Municipal Corporation officials into their claimed government lands. The court dismissed the petition based on the respondent's assurance that no coercive action would be taken without due process.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy Vs The State of A.P. — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.21768 of 2015

¶3

Dated : 17.07.2015

¶4

Between: Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy S/o.Subba Reddy, Age 35 yrs, Chemullapalle Village, Kazipet Mandal, Kadapa District & others .. Petitioners And The State of A.P., rep., by its Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration, Secretariat, Hyderabad & another .. Respondents

¶5

This Court made the following :

¶6

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION No.21768 of 2015

¶8

ORDER :

¶9

The petitioners claim to be in possession of lands to an extent of Ac.0.23 cents in Sy.No.199/1, Ac.0.15 cents in Sy.No.199/2 and Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.203/B1 of Chinnachowk revenue village of Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District.

¶10

2. According to the petitioners, the above said lands are Government lands which were assigned to the grand father of the 3^rd petitioner by the then Tahsildar, Kadapa on 16.04.1948 and there was no condition of non-alienation of the land in the DKT patta granted to him, and the petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment of the said lands. While so, on 10.07.2015, without prior notice or intimation, the officials of the 2^nd respondent-Municipal Corporation, along with their men, material and machines have come to the petitioners property and tried to disturb their peaceful possession and take over possession. After showing the relevant documents, they went away temporarily but they warned that they would come back and take the possession forcibly. Hence, this writ petition.

¶11

3. On instructions, Sri S.D.Goud, Standing counsel for the 2^nd respondent submits that in so far as the 2^nd respondent-Municipal Corporation is concerned, no attempt is made by them to take possession and there is no such orders issued by the competent authority for taking possession of the said properties claimed by the petitioners, and therefore, learned Standing counsel assures the Court that no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioners, without following the due process.

¶12

4. Having regard to the said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

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

¶14

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 17^th July, 2015. Note : Issue c.c. in two (2) days. B/o. Rds

Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy v. The State of A.P.

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

B. Narsimha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Shankar Singh, Vs The Manager

Dangeti Surya Narayana Murthy, Vs Gollaprolu Nagar Panchayat

Konduboina Srinivasulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Alluri Narayana, S/o. Ashirvadam, Aged 50 years, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Gaddam Venkata Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh