Disposed

N. Anantha Rama Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC8 Feb 2016WP/2643/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of Writ Petitions Nos. 2570 and 2643 of 2014 in conformity with the order dated 21.04.2014 in consolidated petitions, directing the District Collector to refrain from demolishing the house element without a hearing if a representation is filed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were disposed of in conformity with the earlier order dated 21.04.2014, directing suspension of demolition pending a representation.

N. Anantha Rama Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶3

WRIT PETITION Nos.2570 and 2643 of 2014

¶4

Dt:08.02.2016

¶5

Between:

¶6

M.Samba Siva Rao and others.

¶7

… Petitioners

¶8

And

¶9

The Government of Andhra Pradesh and others.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT

¶12

WRIT PETITION Nos.2570 and 2643 of 2014

¶13

PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, invited our attention to the order, dated 21.04.2014, passed in W.P.Nos.33584, 37477, 33931, 34378, 34905 and 34949 of 2013 and prayed for disposal of these writ petitions also in terms thereof.

¶15

Mr.B.Mahender Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader, has no objection for disposal of these two writ petitions in terms of the order, dated 21.04.2014, passed in the aforementioned writ petitions.

¶16

The order, dated 21.04.2014, reads thus:

¶17

“No counter-affidavit is required to be filed in these matters, as it is the allegation of the writ petitioners that without giving any notice of hearing, the house element is sought to be demolished pursuant to the order passed by this Court.

¶18

We, therefore, direct the District Collector concerned, without serving any notice of hearing, demolition should not be proceeded with, provided the petitioners make a representation together with documents in support of their case, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If no such representation is made, in terms of this order, the writ petitions shall stand dismissed. If the representation is made, after giving personal hearing, appropriate decision

¶19

shall be taken by the District Collector concerned, in accordance with law, with reasons. All these Writ Petitions are disposed of with above direction. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.”

¶20

These two writ petitions also stand disposed of in terms of the aforementioned order. If the petitioners fail to make a representation together with documents in support of their case, the consequences as indicated in the order would follow. It is needless to mention that if the representation is made, the District Collector, after giving personal hearing, shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law with reasons.

¶21

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶22

_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ ________________________ S.V. BHATT, J Dt:08.02.2016 kdl

N. Anantha Rama Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Anantha Rama Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.P.Agricultural Officer Association, Vs The Govt. of A.P.

P. Srikanth, Vs State of Telangana

Dr.N.T.R. University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada Vs M.Venkata Vishnu Vardhan

Sri Sherfuddin Vs Si of Police Kamareddy

Maduri Samba Siva Rao Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Maheshwari Trading Company, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh