Writ petition in public interest challenging alleged illegal allotment of government land admitted to be infructuous upon respondents' counter-affidavit; disposed of by High Court as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No. 23616 OF 2004
Date: 03.09.2015
Between:
P. Shameer Basha & others. … Petitioners And The District Collector, Anantapur District & others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No. 23616 OF 2004
PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners in the instant writ petition make the following prayer:
“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents in assigning the same land in Sy.No.202 of Kutagula Village, Kadiri Mandal, Anantapur District which has been transferred in favour of the unani dispensary for construction of hospital in favour of 5th and 6th respondents as illegal, arbitrary and one without jurisdiction and pass such other or further orders as the Hon’ble Court feels deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
The 1st and 2nd respondents have filed counter affidavit and in paragraph Nos.3 to 5 they have stated that the land, as stated in the prayer clause, was never allotted to respondent Nos.5 and 6 and the land allotted to them is different from the land mentioned herein.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in view of the statements made on affidavit in paragraph Nos.3 to 5 of the counter affidavit, in particular paragraph No.5, nothing further survives in the writ petition.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as infructuous. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
________________________ S.V. BHATT, J Date: 03.09.2015 ES
P. Shameer Basha & others
District Collector, Anantapur District & others
Dilip B. Bhosale
S.V. Bhatt
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
