Disposed

Smt. Nanneboina Veeramma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Feb 2023WP/12981/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this special original jurisdiction case, the petitioner challenged a memo rejecting her stay application as arbitrary. The Court observed that the underlying revision petition remained pending. Consequently, it disposed of the writ without deciding merits, directing the respondent to dispose of the revision within four months. Status quo continued.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to dispose of the pending revision petition within four months; Status quo continued.

Smt. Nanneboina Veeramma Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

t³³⁰³ I

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOIJSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 't2981 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Nanneboina Veeramma, Wo Late Chandraiah, Aged about 80 years, agriculture, Resident of H. No. 2-77, Gollagudem, Kothagudem Town and Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District-

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Secretary, Tribal Welfare (LTR) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Addl. Agent to Government, Bhadrachalam, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶14

The Agency Divisional Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Laxmidevipally, LaxmidevipallyMandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶16

Yallavula Nagamani, Wo Venkanna Aged major, Resident of Hemachandrapuram Village, Laxmidevipally Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶17

Sankula Srinivas @ Dasari Srinivas, S/o Komaraiah, Aged major, Resident of Gollagudem, Kothagudem Town and Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

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 declaring the Memo No. 575/TW.LTR/2021 dated 26-05-2021 issued by the Government of Telangana, Tribal Welfare^(LTR) Department rejecting'stay of order of the 3rd respondent as illegal and arbitrary and

¶20

--7

¶21

¶22

consequently to stay the order of the Addl. Agent to Government, Bhadrachalarn in CMA 51 of 2018 dated 19-10-2019

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶24

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 to stay operation of order in CMA 51 of 2018 dated^{'19-10-2019passed} by Addl. Agent to Government, Bhadrachalam, 3rd respondent herein, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶25

lA NO: 2 OF 202't

¶26

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 to extend the order of status^quo granted on 0910612021 in l.A No 1 of 2021 in W.P. No 12981 of 2021 until further orders pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. R R KALYAN

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶29

Counsel forthe Respondent No.5: GP FOR REVENUE

¶30

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶31

¶32

:i '..:.-..t . ._i_dli

,-.4 :#

,t5I .s

\ {

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶37

WRIT PETITION No.1298 L of 2O2l

¶38

ORDER:

¶39

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare.

¶40

This writ petition is filed seeking writ of maldarnus declaring the order passed by the respondent No.2 in Memo No.575/^fW.LTR/2O21 dated 26.O5.2O21 rejecting the stay application while admitting the revisioo petition filed by the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner filed revision petition before the respondent No.2 aggrievcd b-y the orcler passed by the respondcnt No.3 in CMA No.5 i of 2O i tt clated 19. 1O.2O 19 confirming the order passed by respondent No.4 in LTR Case No.1/201,7 /Ldp clated 12.12.2O17

¶42

He further submits that respondent No.2 while admitting the revision petition rejected the stay petition rvithout giving any opportunitlz to thc petitioner and passed impugned Memo No.575/TW.LTR/2O21 dated 2O.O7.2O 19. By' virtue oF the rejection of the stay, the respondent No.S is trying to t.ake steps to vacate the

¶43

petitioner from the subjec:t land. This court on 09.06.2021 while ordering notice before admission granted Status-Quo order and the same is continuing till date.

¶44

A pr:rusal of the record would reve a1 that the revision petiti()n filed by the petitioner is pending before respondent Nr,.2.

¶45

In view of the pendency of statutory revision, without going into the mcrits o[ the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing rcspondent No.2 to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner within a period of four: months lrom the datc <.r i receipt of the copy of this order after giving opportunity to the petitioner as well as respondents in the revision petition in accordance with law. Till such time the Status-Quo order granted by this Court on 09.06.2021 shall continue.

¶46

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if

¶47

any, pending in this writ petition, shall stands closed.

¶48

¶49

SD/.P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSTSTA,/r REGTSTRAR ,TRUE COPY// . tt, I SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal secretary, sociar werfare Department, secretariat, The state of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶50

The Secretary, Tribal Welfare (LTR) Department, Secretariat, The Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶51

--7

¶52

¶53

The Addl. Agent to Government, Bhadrachalam, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶54

The Agency Divisional Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem', ' Bhadradri-Kothagudem District.

¶55

One CC to Sri. R R Kalyan, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for State of Telangana, [OUT]

¶57

Two CCs to GP for Social Welfare, High Court for the State of Telangana. lourl

¶58

Two.CD Copies TJ \ BS P

.s ,d

HIGH COURT

JSR,J

DATED:02102t2023

ORDER

WP.No.12981 ot 2021

ILA I 'st^t_€

..*
1t{ e STAI^.
€
r(
:)
iJ 21 tEB 2023 -l
,arq
,::H
: .:t- nqgpqlc' '
':=nT ':" * "

¶73

i:4

¶74

E :ffi

¶75

DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶76

,1/ 2
*\ t\ to
59<br>

¶77

,i I

Smt. Nanneboina Veeramma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nanneboina Veeramma v. The State of Telangana

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

Chinnam Satyanarayana alias Rajura Satyam Vs The State of Telangana and 5 Others

M/s. Apex Agro Tech, rep. by its Vs The State of Telangana, rep.

M/s.R.K. Boards and Panels Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Principal

Bushra Yasmeen Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principle Social

Master Ambothu Ritesh,Mahabubnagar Dist Vs State Govt.of Ap,Rep.by Prl.Scy, Sw Dept,Hyd,and 2 Otrs

Bagam Chandra Shekar Vs The State of Telangana