Dismissed

J. Subhash, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Chief

Telangana HC12 Apr 2023WP/3966/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed Writ Petition No. 3966 of 2013 seeking declaration of illegality regarding land revenue records and eviction from government poramboke lands. The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution as the petitioners failed to appear or present representations on the date assigned for dismissal.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ stand closed.

J. Subhash, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶7

wRlT PETITION NO: 3966 OF 2013

¶8

Between:

¶9

J. Subhash, S/o. Narayana, Aged 52 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Gudihathnur Viilage & Maridat, Aditibad Disrri6t.

¶10

J .Goutha-m, S/o. Shanker, Aged 48 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandal, Adilabad District.

¶11

J. Ramesh, S/o. Shanker, Aged 52 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandat, -Aditabad District.-

¶12

J. Radha Bai, Wo. Shivaji, Aged 60 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandal, Aditabdd District.

¶13

K. Prabhu Qa9, S{o,.Saima[u,..4Se!-10 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandal, Adilab;d Districi.

¶14

Kummari Sath.ya Raju, S/o.. Pochanna Late Aged 40 years, Occ. Agriculture, Gudihathnur Village & Mandat, Adilabad Diskici.

¶15

Kothuri Pochioa S/o Rajiga-, Aged _48 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. G ud ihath n ur Vit-tage a tura nd 5[ Io ii^jBio oislridt]*'^-

¶16

Dubbaka Sattaiah, S/o. Rajiga,..4ge.d_ 40 years, Occ. Agricutture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & uanaai^-Roitauid Districi.

¶17

L S.,..Piraji, -S/o. Khandu, Aged 65 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandal, Adilabad.District.-

¶18

10.9...Tukaram, S/o. Pandu, Aged 59 years, - Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Gudihathnur Village & Mandal, Adilabad District.

¶19

...PETITIONERS

¶20

AND

¶21

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Chief, Secretary, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad.

¶22

The Government of A.P., Rep by its principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildin6s Hydera6ad.

¶23

The Government of A.P, Rep by its principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

¶24

¶25

4 The G.overnme_n! A P,, Rep by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings Hydera6ad

¶26

The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally, Government of A.P., Hyderabad.

¶27

The Collector, Adilabad District, A.p.

¶28

7 l!9 Specla I Deputy Collector, Head Quarters at Utnoor, Tribal Welfare Adilabad District.

¶29

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad Revenue Division, Adilabad District.

¶30

...RESPONDENTS

¶31

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 lssue a writ, order, direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 6, 7 and B not entering the names of writ petitioners in Revenue Records/Pahanis in their respective Survey Number lands as mentioned in writ petition affidavit para 5, Sy.N3.88 situated in jurisdiction of 8th Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutiona I clear violation of Article 14, 19 (1) (e), 21, & 300-A of the Constitution of tndia as weil as contrary to the provisions of section 3 of A.P., Land Transfer Regulation lg5g by setting aside the letter in RC.NO. RCl216t2O12, O/o. Tahsildar, Gudihathnoor, dt 2911112012 and consequentiy direct the respondents No. 6 to B not to evict the writ petitioners who are cultivation the Government poramboke lands in schedule areas which commences prior to Land Transfer Regulation '1959 (which made applicable to Telangana area on 01-i2-1963) came into force and not to remove their names from pahani records in 8th Respondent schedule areas of Adilabad District and pass

¶32

(Prayer is amended as per C.O. dt 1412113 in WPMP 5494 OF 2013)

¶33

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO:4951 OF 2013)

¶34

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 No.6 to 8 not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of petitioners land situated in their respective survey numbers as mentioned in writ petition affidavit para 5, Sy No.88 which commences prior to Land Transfer Regulation 1959 came in to force (i.e., on 01-12-1963 in Telangana area) of the Government poramboke lands in schedule areas in 8th Respondent Adilabad District, pending disposal of the main writ petition

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI J. SATYA PRASAD (NOT PRESENT)

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent Nos..1,4,5,6,7&g: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶37

Counset for the Respondent Nos.2&3: Gp FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶38

The Court made the foltowing: ORDER

¶39

HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICEJ' SREENTVASRAO} TPE^TI TIONN^{o.3966 of2o13}

¶40

o ER:

¶41

When^{the matter was taken up for hearing on} 29 .O3.2O23,^{there was no representationon behalf of the} petitioners^{and to give one opportunityto the petitioners'} the^{matterwas directed to be listedunderthe caption"for} dismissal"^{on 72'O4'2023'}

¶42

lnspite^{of listingthe matter under the caption}

¶43

,,for dismissal", there is^{no representationon behalf of the} petitioners^{today' Therefore' it appears that the petitioners} have no^{interestin prosecuting this case'}

¶44

Accordingly,^{the Writ Petition is dismissed for} non prosecution'^{Thereshall be no order as to costs'}

¶45

Miscellaneous^{petitions,if any' pending in this Writ}

¶46

Petition, shall^{stand closed.}

¶47

SD/- G. SIREESHA ASStSTANT REGISTRA ,/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To,

¶49

1 One CC to SRl. J SATYA PRASAD Advocate [OPUC] 2 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court^{for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶50

J Triro CCs to- GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE ,High Court^{for the Stateof} Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 Two CD Copies KKS GJP ")

i I i I i

HIGH COURT

DATED:12 t04t2023

ORDER

WP.No.3966 of 2013

'\ ;-sr-
q)
/-?
oJ !
t-) 11 fiAY 2$23
:.':j
,:.-.

¶57

DISMISSING OF THE WP FOR NON.PROSECUTION WITHOUT^COSTS

¶58

¶59

I
fl1
/'ul

¶60

s.'D

J. Subhash, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J. Subhash, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Nagishettigari Kashiram Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Yellavula Paparao Vs The State of Telangana

Mudiraj Matsya Paresrameka Singam Vs The Assistant Director of Fisheries and Ex-Officio Deputy

Nalluri Ramakrishna, Vs Government of a.P., repre., by its Principal Secretary

Bellamkonda Gattaiah, Vs Secy., Social Welfare dept., State of T.S.

Pampana Satyamayana Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh