Disposed
Marathu Madhavi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal
Telangana HCWP/21706/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION…
What the court decided
AI extract
SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION…
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION Nos.21703, 21704, 21705, 21706, 21708, 21728, 21737, 21764, 21772 and 21785 OF 2016
COMMON ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department (Andhra Pradesh), learned Government Pleader for Revenue and also Sri Ancha Pandu Ranga Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondentCorporation. With consent of the counsel appearing for both sides, all the writ petitions is disposed of at the admission stage.
2. These Writ Petitions are filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of various extents of the petitioners’ sites in Sy.Nos.2168 to 2170, 2184 to 2189, 2190 and 2197/3 situated at NGOs Colony, Kothur Village, Nellore Bit-I, Nellore Municipal Corporation limits, SPSR Nellore District without initiating any proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Sections 145 to 147 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and also offends Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession of petitioners’ site without following due process of law.
3. Though various grounds are raised in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer seeking a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the property in
dispute without following due process of law.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that no action shall be initiated by the respondents without following due process of law.
5. Having regard to the submissions made, and without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the 2nd respondent not to take any coercive steps against the property in dispute without following due process of law. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
Date:05.07.2016 INL
Petitioners (unnamed)
2nd Respondent (Nellore Municipal Corporation)
C. Praveen Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court