Disposed

Boddireddy Srinu, S/o.late Kondarao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC13 Jul 2017WP/23214/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging dispossession from land without proceedings. Court disposed of petition directing authorities not to dispossess petitioner except following due legal procedure.

What did the court decide?

Not to dispossess the petitioner from the land except in accordance with the procedure established under law.

What the court decided

Boddireddy Srinu, S/o.late Kondarao Vs The State of… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.23214 OF 2017

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, came to be filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from his land admeasuring Ac.1.74 cents in survey No.88/1B and Ac.1-00 cents in survey No.90/1 situated at Ramuldevapuram Village, Gangavaram (Agency) Mandal, East Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondents 1 to 3. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself. Since this Court is not going into the merits of the case, there is no necessity to issue notice to respondents 4 and 5.

¶6

The limited grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the respondent-authorities, at the instance of unofficial respondents, are trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject lands, referred to above, without initiating any proceedings and without giving any notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition came to be filed.

¶7

Learned AGP, on instructions, denied the allegations made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. He further submits that if the respondents-authorities intend to take any action against the petitioner, due process of law would be followed.

¶8

¶9

Having regard to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents-authorities not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac.1.74 cents in survey No.88/1B and Ac.1-00 cents in survey No.90/1 situated at Ramuldevapuram Village, Gangavaram (Agency) Mandal, East Godavari District, except in accordance with the procedure established under law.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶11

________________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

¶12

13.07.2017 sur

Boddireddy Srinu, S/o.late Kondarao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Boddireddy Srinu, S/o.late Kondarao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

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

Mr.Ranjit Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Mr.Jagan Mohan Vs Mr.T.Dharmaiah

K.Akkulappa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary

Barigela Andalu , P.Andalu, Vs The State of Telangana

LyagalaSudhakar, Vs The State of Telangana

ltta Krishnaveni, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh