Disposed

Vaklothu Pedda Balu Naik, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC22 Jan 2016WP/1778/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the writ petition without adjudicating merits. It directly ordered the 4th respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representations on assigned lands within eight weeks, after hearing the petitioner and the 5th respondent, invoking principles from Section 4(1)(b) of the relevant Andhra Pradesh Act.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 4th Respondent to dispose of representations within eight weeks after hearing the parties.

Vaklothu Pedda Balu Naik, Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.1778 OF 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

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

¶5

2. The present writ petition came to be filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents 2 to 4 in taking proper action as per law and existing rules basing on the representations made by the petitioner in Revenue Sadassu on 27.01.2012 and Janma Bhoomi on 02.12.2013 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct respondents 2 to 4 to take proper action by enquiring the matter basing on the above said representations made by the petitioner to restore the possession as per Section 4(1)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977.

¶6

3. Though various grounds are raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representations submitted to the authorities are not considered and as such, a direction is sought for considering the said representations at the earliest.

¶7

4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue did not dispute the same, provided the authorities shall hear all the aggrieved persons.

¶8

5. Without going into the merits of the case and having regard to the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing

¶9

the 4^th respondent-Tahsildar to dispose of the representations made by the petitioner in Revenue Sadassu on 27.01.2012 and in Janma Bhoomi on 02.12.2013, at the earliest, preferably within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if they are still pending consideration. It is needless to mention that the authorities shall hear the petitioner and the 5^th respondent before passing any order on the representations.

¶10

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

_______________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶12

Date:22.01.2016 INL

Vaklothu Pedda Balu Naik, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vaklothu Pedda Balu Naik, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasamsetti Srinivasa Rao Vs Chirla Sri Rama Chandra Redddy

M.V.S.R. Prasad S/o Madhava Rao Vs The Government of a.P., rep by Principal Secretary

D. Sammaiah, Vs The Divisional Engineer Electrical (Construction and

Prathipati Samabasiva Rao S/O subbaiah, Residing at Gani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by The

Sri Bachala Ramesh, Vs The Commissioner and Inspector General

Harijana Pothalaiah Vs The District Collector and Magistrate