Disposed

Nemali Rajini v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Telangana HC21 Sept 2022WP/2627/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-action on a representation alleging illegal road and canal construction on her land. High Court, without merits, directed the District Collector to consider the representation, conduct a hearing, and pass orders within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 16.12.2020, provide a hearing, and pass orders within four weeks.

Nemali Rajini Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENry FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 2627 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Nemali Rajini, Sio. Srinivas Reddy, Age.48 years. Occ. Agriculture. R/o. H.No. 1- 1, Paintru Village, H /o. Erragaddalagudem, Tipparthy Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana and 4 others, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶11

The District Collector, Nalgonda District.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Tipparthy Mandal, Tipparthy, Nalgonda District.

¶14

The Executive Engineer, lB Division, lrrigation and CAD Department, Nalgonda.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus the action of the Respondents No. 2lo^{4 in not acting upon the} Petitioners representation daled. 16-12-2020^{requesting to take action againstthe} illegal acts of the Respondent^{No.5in laying20 wide road and digging 12 wide} canal in Petitioners^{Patta land i.e., Ac.1- 00 gts. in Sy.No.44111/1situatedat} pajiuru Village H/o. Erragaddalagudem, Tipparthy Mandal,^{NalgondaDistrict} without issuing any^{noticeto the Petitioneras illegal, arbitrary and violativeof} Articles^.19 and 21 of the^{constitution of lndia and consequently direct the} Respondents to^{take actionon Petitioner'srepresentation daled.16-12-2020.}

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the Respondents to take action upon the Petitioners representation dated. 16-122020 forthwith.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ANNAPURNA SREERAM

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.2627 of 2O2l

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 to 4, and the learned Government Pleader for Irrigation & CAD for respondent No.S. With their consent, the present Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

¶26

Aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not acting upon the petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2020 requesting to take action against the illegai acts ol respondent No.5 in Iaying 20'wide road in petitioner's patta land at Pajjuru Village, H/o.Erragaddalagudem, Tipparthy Mandal, Nalgonda District, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶27

Having regard to the fact that the representation of the petitioner is pending consideration before the respondent authorities, without going into the merits or demerits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 16.12.2022 submitted by the petitioner and pass necessary orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

¶28

¶29

this order. [t is needless to mention that before^passing any orders, the parties shall be^put on notice and afforded an opportunity of hearing. A copy of the order to be^passed by respondent No.2 shall be communicated to the^parties.

¶30

The miscellaneous petitions^pending, if any, shall stand

¶31

closed. There shali be no order as to costs.

¶32

,TRUE COPY//

¶33

SD/.L.SIVA PARVATHI ASSISTANT REGIS*AR

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, State of Telangana Hyderabad

¶38

2 The District Collector, Nalgonda District.

¶39

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶40

4 The Tahsildar, Tipparthy Mandal, Tipparthy, Nalgonda District. c The Executive Engineer, lB Division, lrrigation and CAD Department, Nalgonda.

¶41

One CC to SRl. ANNAPURNA SREERAM Advocate IOPUC]

¶42

7 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE , High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶43

8 One Spare copy

¶44

o Two CD Copies SAB *&,

"r"t'

HIGH^COURT

DATED:21^t0912022

ORDER

WP.No.2627^{of 2021}

.z E SlAl.d
{r1 or)
oJ
2 3 rE[ 2[??
.^
:\ -.) '.

¶51

DISPOSING OF WRIT^PETITION

¶52

WITHOUT COSTS

¶53

v-?z-\ U
4v

Nemali Rajini v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nemali Rajini v. The State of Telangana and 4 others

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

Gajjela Krishna Murty Vs The State of Telangana

Auth Sign.,M/S. Sushee Hitech-Prasad-Ncc Mytas Jv, Hyderabad Vs Cheif Secy, State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 5 Others

Smt. Bagireddygari Sunitha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Jogi Babu Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Mr.Mohammed Aseem Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

M/s Sri Shyam Additives Vs The State of Telangana