Remanded

Nadakuditi Venkata Subba Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC7 Jul 2017WP/22376/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed a writ petition against stereotype orders declaring encroachment without considering the petitioner's explanation and without mentioning the extent, setting them aside and remanding to authorities to act fairly.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; remanded to 2nd respondent to consider explanation individually and pass orders within 30 days; no demolition action till then.

Nadakuditi Venkata Subba Rao, Vs The State of Andhra… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO

¶2

W.P.No.22376 OF 2017

¶3

ORDER

¶4

This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

¶5

“… to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings in ROC.No…/2017, dated 15.6.2017 issued by the 2^nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, improper and without jurisdiction and also violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s property pursuant to the impugned proceedings and pass such other order and orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶6

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for the respondents.

¶7

The petitioners are claiming to be in possession of small extents of land in Ibrahimpatnam Gram Panchayat. A notice dated 1.5.2017 was issued alleging that they have encroached the Government land, which was required for the purpose of laying a road and they were asked to submit their explanation. Accordingly, the petitioners submitted their explanation. But,

¶8

¶9

without considering the same, when stereotype orders were passed on 15.06.2017, the present writ petition is filed.

¶10

This Court carefully perused the impugned orders dated 15.6.2017 and noticed that all the orders are of stereotype and the extent of encroachment was not mentioned therein.

¶11

In the circumstances, this Court is constrained to set aside the impugned orders dated 15.6.2017.

¶12

Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 15.6.2017 are set aside, the Writ Petition is allowed and the matter is remanded to the 2^nd respondent, who in turn, is directed to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioners individually and pass appropriate orders within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, no action for demolition of the alleged encroachment shall be taken. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶13

___________________________________ JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO

¶14

7^th July, 2017 rkk

Nadakuditi Venkata Subba Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadakuditi Venkata Subba 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Penmusta Sree Devi Vs The District Registrar and Collector, U/S.41-A of I.S.

Smt.Alluri Padma Vs The District Registrar and Collector

Smt. Indira Jyothi , Shama Khatoon, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Barigi Srinivasulu Vs The State of Andhdra Pradesh,Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Pamarthi Naga Venkata Madhavi Vs State of Andhra Pradesh.

N.Maddileti, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh