The court disposed of the writ petition questioning the inaction of Respondent No. 1 in implementing orders of 1991. It directed Respondent No. 1 to act on the petitioner's notice of 06.05.2010 within twelve weeks.
Direction to Respondent No. 1 to take steps to act on the notice dated 06.05.2010 within a period of twelve weeks from its receipt.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No. 26301 of 2012
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader for Revenue. With the consent of both the parties, the main writ petition is heard at the admission stage itself.
Questioning the inaction of respondent No.1 in implementing the orders in L.G.O.P.No.199 of 1991, dated 31.08.1998 passed by the Special Court-cumDistrict Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, present writ petition is filed.
The facts in issue are as under:
The petitioner herein filed L.G.O.P.No.199 of 1991 before the Special Court-cum-District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam seeking eviction of respondents from the land admeasuring 1100 square yards situated at Kothapet, Vijayawada and to deliver possession of the land which was bequeathed by Vemavarapu Sita Maha Lakshmamma for the purpose of construction of a temple for their family diety. The above case was contested by the respondents and after a full fledged trial, the Special Court allowed the L.G.O.P. on 31.08.1998 declaring the respondents therein as land grabbers. It is stated that no
appeal has been preferred by the respondents aggrieved by the said order. Since the possession is not delivered, the petitioner herein filed I.A.No.50 of 2003 requests the Special Court to communicate the order dated 31.08.1998 and to direct respondent No.1 to evict respondent Nos.4 to 35 with the help of police, if necessary. On 17.02.2003 the Special Court is said to have communicated the order vide Dis.No.928. Thereafter, the petitioner is alleged to have addressed letters dated 07.10.2003, 15.09.2004, 18.03.2010 and 17.04.2010 to respondent No.1 seeking action but inspite of receipt of the same, no steps were taken to deliver possession of the property. It is stated that even though a legal notice was issued on 06.05.2010, there is no action from the respondents. The in action of respondent No.1 lead to filing of the present writ petition.
Though various grounds are raised in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer seeking a direction to respondent No.1 to pass orders on the representation made by the petitioner for implementation of the orders passed in L.G.O.P.No.199 of 1991.
Government Pleader for Revenue submits that if the representation is made and if the same is still pending, the same may be directed to be disposed of in accordance with law.
Without going into the merits of the case and having regard to the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.1 to take steps in accordance with law, to the notice dated 06.05.2010 issued by the petitioner, as early as possible, preferably within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. No order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
05.01.2016 gkv
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be disposed of by directing the respondent to take steps to implement a previous order.
Whether the representation regarding the implementation of the order dated 31.08.1998 can be acted upon.
Whether a specific time limit can be fixed for the implementation of the order.
Petitioner
Government Pleader for Revenue
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
