This judgment is a disposal of a Writ Petition under Article 226 challenging the seizure of bore wells and disconnection of power, set aside with a direction to follow due procedure.
The memo dated 09.10.2014 was set aside and respondents directed to follow due procedure with notice after the court order.
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.
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 3057s oF 2014
Between:
...PETIT|ONERS
AND
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 or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent herein in seizing two bore wells in our land in Sy.No. 241 of Kethireddypalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and disconnecting the power supply without any notice and jurisdiction as bad arbitrary, illegal and violation of principles of Natural Justice and also contrary to the provisions of APWALTA Act, 2OO2 and consequently direct the respondents to remove the seizure of two bore wells of the petitioners in Sy.No.241 of Kethireddypalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2014lWP MP. NO: 38228 OF 2014
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 direct the respondents to remove the seizure of two bore wells of the petitioners in Sy.No.241 of Kethireddypalli Village, tMoinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2014(WPMP NO: 45272 OF 2014
Between:
Smt. P.Balamani, W/o. Sri P. Bal Reddy, Age 57 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Kaothireddypally, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, TLlangana State.
...PETlTIONEFY PROPOSEDRESPONDENTNO.s AND
Respondents l to 3 Rt/o Kethireddypally Village Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.
Petition under Section 1 51 CPC prayang that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased implead the petitioner herein as respondent No.5 in W.P.No.3O5lS ot 2O14
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI C.DAMOOAR REOOY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI P.K|SHORE RAO, SC FOR PANCHAYAT
RAJ & RURAL DEV
Counsel for the PROPOSED Respondent No.5: SRI P.RAMABRAHMAM The Court made the following: ORDER
SK, J W.P.No.30575 of 2014
I I
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
W.P.No.3O575 of 2OL4
ORDER:
This writ petition is hled with the following
prayer:
" to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent herein in seizing two bore wells in the land of the petitioners in Sy.No.24 I of Kethireddypalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and disconnecting the power supply without any notice and jurisdiction as bad, arbitrary, illegal and violation of principles of Natural .Justice and also contrary to the provisions of APWALTA Act 2OO2 and consequently direct the respondents to remove the seizure of two bore wells of the petitioners in Sy. No. 241 of Kethireddypalli Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.'
on 13.10.2014 this Court granted interim suspension of the memo dated O9. LO.2OL4 and directed the respondents to restore the seized two bore wells of the petitioners pending further orders and in view of the said interim order, the respondents are restored the two bore wells of the petitioners.
.4.
2
SK, J W. P.No 30575 ot 2014
petition. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the memo dated O9. LO.2O|4 issued by the respondent No.3. If the respondents want to take any action in this regard, they have to follow due procedure in accordance with law after issuing notice to the petitioner. No order as
to costs
Miscellaneous Applications, if any pending in this
writ petition, shall_s-tancl close4.
\ sol- ).pneveEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
To
SECT ON OFFICER
PSK.
JP
HIGH COURT
DATED:1010112024
ORDER
WP.No.30575 of 2014
H s T r 6'
k
v
U 2 0 t E B ) 02 4
*
ESPATC\ rc-l]
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS.
@c"?'' qw-%"
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the action of the respondents in seizing bore wells and disconnecting power was arbitrary and illegal under the APWALTA Act, 2002.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Bonagiri Chandra Reddy and others
The District Collector, Panchayath Raj (Wing) Ranga Reddy District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division
The Tahsildar, Moinabad Mandal
Govt of Telangana, Panchayath Raj Department
Justice K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
