Disposed

P.Sudershan Goud v. The District Panchayat Officer

Telangana HC20 Nov 2023WP/19559/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by shop owners evicted from Panchayat premises challenging arbitrary eviction. Court disposed of petition directing respondents not to dispossess petitioners without following due process of law, deciding no further on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents not to dispossess petitioners from shops without following due process of law.

P.Sudershan Goud Vs The District Panchayat Officer — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 19559 OF 2009

¶7

Between:

¶8

P.Sudershan Goud, S/o Baswa Goud, aged 37 years, Occ: Cycle Reparing Shop No 101 Kalagalli Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶9

Baswa Goud, S/o Dharma Goud, aged 57^years, Occ: Carpenter Shop^No 102 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶10

Gulam Hussain, S/o.Shabuddin, aged 52^years, Occ: Welder, Shop^No103 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶11

Mohd Baba, S/o Abdul Nabi, aged 37^years, Occ: Welder, Shop^{No 105} Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶12

Noorjaham Begum, Wo. Late Syed Ghouse, aged 47^years, Occ:^Tin Shed Cycle Reparing Shop No 107 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶13

Zahida Begum, W/o. Yousf, aged 47^years, Occ: Cycle Tax Shop^No108, Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶14

Yadullah, S/o. Abdul Qayam, aged 37^years, Occ : Motor^{Winding Shop No} 1 10 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶15

Mahboob Bee, W/o. Shaik Hussain, aged : 57^years, Occ:^Hoteel Shop^No '1 11 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶16

Wadla Vithal, S/o. Ragunath, aged 34^years, Occ: Carpenter^{ShopNo 112} Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶17

Wadla Sailoo, S/olaxmaiah, aged 62^years, Occ:^{Welding Shop NO1 13} Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad District

¶18

l l.Archanapalli Laxman, S/o. Venkattramloo, aged 37^{years, Occ:Motor Cycle} Mechanic Shop No¹ 14 Yellareddy(V) and(M) Nizamabad^District

¶19

...PETITIONERS

¶20

AND

¶21

1 The District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad^{District NizamabadDist} 2 The Gram Panchayat Yella Reddy, Yellareddy^{Mandal, NizamabadDistrict} 3 The Gram Panchayat Yellareddy,^{Rep.byits Sarpanch,Nizamabad District}

¶22

...RESPONDENTS

¶23

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of Mandamus decraring the action of the respondent in evicting the petitroners from their shops bearing Nos.101 ,102, 103, 1OS, 107,108, i11,112, 113 and 114 respectivery situated on the reft side of pwD .Main Road of yerareddy (v)and(M) Nizamabad District as iregar arbitrary and further direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from shops bearing Nos.101, 102, 103,105, 107, 1Og, 111, 112' 113 and 114 respectivery situated on the ,eft side of pwD Main Road of Yellareddy (V)and(M) Nizamabad District.

¶24

l.A. NO:1 OF 2009(wP MP. NO: 25538 0 F 2009)

¶25

Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in suppo( of the petition, the High court may be preased direct the respondents not to interfere wrth the peacefur possession of the petitioners shops bearing Nos..t01 ,102,103.105,107,108,111,112,113,&114 respectivety situated on the reft side of pwD Main Road of yerareddy (v)&(M) Nizamabad District.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioner : SRI KRAIVIAKR|SHNA,

¶27

rep., SRI P.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : cp FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV

¶29

Counsel for the Respondents No.2&3 : SRt R.CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY, SC FOR TG.MPPS GPPS

¶30

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶31

¶32

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PETITIONNo.19559 of2OO9

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

This writ petition is filed seeking the following

¶35

reliel

¶36

"issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in evicting the petitioners from their shops bearing Nos. 1O 1 , lo2, 103, 105, 107, 108, 117, tt2, 113 and114 respectively situated on the left side of pWD Main Road of Yellareddy Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District, as illegal, arbitrary, and further direct the respondents not to evict the petitioners from shops bearing Nos. 1O1, 102, 103, l05, 107, tOa, ltl, ll2, 173 and114 respectively situated on the left side of PWD Main Road of yellareddy Village and Mandal, Nizamabad District. "

¶37

Sri K.Ramakrishna, learned counsel representing Sri P. Raghavendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government pleader for Panchayat R^j for respondent No.l and Sri R.Chandrashekar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶38

Learnec.c,ounsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners are doing petty business in the subject shops and they are paying tax to the respondent-authorities

¶39

iiIr 141).

¶40

f :l:t

¶41

¶42

regularly. Further, he submits that, the respondents without issuing any notice trying to evict the petitioners and the action of the respondents is clear violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶43

Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that, the respondents will follow the due procedure as available under law and the petitioners are not having any right in the subject matter of the property. However, the respondents will follow the due procedure as contemplated under law.

¶44

In view of the above submissions, without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property without following due process of 1aw.

¶45

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of, accordingly. No costs.

¶46

¶47

;-7

¶48

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶49

stand closed.

¶50

SD/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGIST

¶51

//TRUE COPY//

¶52

SECTI OFFICER

¶53

To, 1. The District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad District.Nizamabad Dist z. iii" eii.^{prnCnavitYella Reddy, Yellareddv(M) Nizamabad District} 5: iii; G;;.i^{piiiiniiitYellareddv,Relc-.[v-its Sarpanch, Nizamabad District} ;: d; cc i" snr^{p.(AcunvENDRAREtiDY,Advocate.[oPUc]} d. iil ccd t. cp^{ron pnNCnAyAT RAJ& RURAL DEV, High court for the} State of Telangana^{at Hyderabad.} {OU-TI---^.. ^. o. 6'"" cc toSHin.cHn6,tb-RAsnr'xen'REDDY,^{sc for SC FoRTG-MPPS} GPPS. [OPUC]

¶54

Two CD CoPies.

BSK GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:2011112023

E SrAi6
1
S 0Et 2[?l -bo
31
+
*
D :i /-\T a.

¶59

ORDER

¶60

WP.No.19559 of 2009

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶62

P.Sudershan Goud v. The District Panchayat Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Sudershan Goud v. The District Panchayat Officer

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

K. Srinivasulu Vs The District Panchayath Officer

Mohammed Sharfuddin Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd. Taher Pasha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kota Amala , Kanchepogu Amala, Vs Prl.Secy., Civil Supplies Dept., Hyd., and 5 Others

Salugu Bikshapati Vs The State of Telangana

K. Prasad Rao Vs The Deputy Registrar/ Osd