The High Court, acknowledging that the constitutionality of the challenged Act was settled law, directed the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal to the Revenue Divisional Officer before disposal, while disposing the writ petition.
Liberity to file appeal to Revenue Divisional Officer; Writ petition disposed without costs.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OFDECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJALBHUYAN AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEC.V. BHASKARREDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 12728 OF 2008
Between:
Muktha Bai ,, Wo. Madhav R/o. Yenka Village,Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1 . Government of Andhra Pradesh,, RevenueDepartment,repby its Secretary, at Secretariat, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith,the High Court maybe pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any Direction declaring the Andhra Pradesh(Assigned Land Prohibition of Transfers) Acl, 1977 as violative of Art14,19(1)(e),(f),(g),21 & 31 of Constitution oflndiaand hence unconstitutional, delcare and set aside order of the3rd respondentdt. 16-2-2008 passed in proceeding No.C/3069/04 as illegal, arbitrary and withoutjurisdiction apart from being unconstituional and further direct therespondents torestore physical possession of petitioners land to an extent of Ac.4.00 gtsin Sy.No.53/KK of Yenka village, UtnoorMandal, forthwith. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2008(WPMP. NO: 16424 OF 2008)
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that inthe circumstancesstated in the affirCavit filed in support of thepetition,the High Courtmaybe pleasedto issue interim dirctions to the respondents toforthwith restorepossessionof petitioners land to an extent of Ac.4.00 gts in Sy.No.53/KK of Yenka village, Utnoor Mandal, Adilabad District.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S S REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: GP FORREVENUE Counsel for the RespondentNo. 4: SRI JOGRAMTEJAVAT Ttre Court made the following:ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHIIYAN AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BIIASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.12728 of 2OO8
ORDER: eer the Hon'ble the Chief J stice l.Jjjal Btwydn)
Heard Mr. S.Sudeep Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner
I I
2
Bodhan, Ni2amabad Districtt.
7 . Subject to the above, writ petition is disposed of.
'AIR1987Ap 160(FB) : 1987 (1) ApLJ l7l(FB)
I
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
I
SD/. N. CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// )
SECTION OFFICER
To,
'1 . The Secretary, Revenue Department, at secretariat, Government of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad.
gsk
t
HIGH COURT
DATED: 13112t2022
ORDER
1 e STATc
I
i. I
3 $s lru ru8
(/ .-::t..1
WP.No.12728 ot 2008
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
uO
619
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be allowed to challenge the constitutionality of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 or avail the alternative remedy of appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dharama Reddy v Sub-CollectorRelied on¶30
Dharama Reddy v Sub-Collector, Bodhan, Ni2amabad Districtt., AIR 1987Ap 160(FB) : 1987 (1) ApLJ 171(FB) · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Muktha Bai
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Revenue Divisional Officer
Tahsildar
Ade Phanya
Ujjal Bhuyan
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
