Smt. Ganta Anitha Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

132521

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 35319 oF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Ganta Anitha, Wo. Ganta Ravinder Reddy, Aged about 35^years,Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. H.No.5-25l3, E. Bayyaram Village, Pinapaka^Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Principat Secretary, Social^Welfare Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat at Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Additional Agenl to the GovemmenUAppellate Authority,^(P.O.ITDA), Bhadrachalam, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶13

2 The Special Deputy Collector^(TW), Bhadrachalam, Bhadradri^Kothagudem District.

¶14

4 The Tahsildar, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. A Kandi Brahma Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, Occ. Cultivation,^{Fi/o. E. Bayyaram} Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadrad ri Kothagudem District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^{prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more^particularly oneⁱⁿ the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action^{of the 2nd respondentin} not granting stay in M.A.No - ol 2024^{(un-numbered)in C.M.A.No.of 2024 (un'} numbered) which was filed on 21-11-2024 as illegal,^{arbitrary and violative of} principles of natural justice and also violative of the spirit of order 39 Rule^{1 and} 2 and consequently seeking stay of all further^{proceedingsincluding} dispossession of the^{petitioner from the} IaM^{in an extent of Ac.0.3O guntas} situated in Sy.No.17lAAl2^(17lAA) at^{BayyaramVillage, Pinapaka Mandal,} Bhadradri Kothagudem District^pursuant to^{the Proceedings vide LTR Case} No.19/2024lPNK, dated 25-10-2024^passed by the^{3rd respondentpending} disposal of appeal daled 21-11-2024^{on the file of 2nd respondent}

¶17

7

¶18

lA NO: 'f OF 2024

¶19

'Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou!'t may be^pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including dispossession of the petitioners from the land in an extent of Ac.0.30 guntas situated in Sy.No.17lAA,/2^(17lAA) at Bayyaram Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District^pursuant to the LTR Case No.19/2024IPNK, dated 25-10-2024^passed by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the Writ Petition in this Hon'bleCourt

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAMU NALLAMOTHU

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: AGP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.5:-

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

.--.

¶25

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.35319 of 2O24

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard Sri N. Ramu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing on behalf of respondent No,4.

¶29

2, The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:-

¶30

"...to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the znd respondent in not granting stay in M.A.No. of 2024 (un-numbered) in C.M.A.No. of 2024 (un-numbered) which was filed on 21.7r.2024 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of the spirit of order' 39 Rule 1 and 2 and consequently seeking stay of all further proceedings including dispossession of the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac 0.30 guntas situated in Sy No. 17/AAl2 (17/AA) at Bayyaram Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District pursuant to the Proceedings vide LTR Case No.19/2024lPNK, dated 25.10.2024 passed by the 3'd respondent pending disposal of appeal dated 21.11.2024 on the

¶31

2

¶32

file of 2nd respondent and to pass such other orders as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. "

¶33

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.30 guntas situated in Sy.No.17lAA/2 (t7AA) at Bayyaram Village, Pinapaka Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem and had succeeded the same in the partit.ion agreement. Thereafter, the petitioner mutated her name in the revenue records and new pattadar passbook was also issued by respondent No.4 in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, respondent No.5 made representation on 25.06.2024 against the petitioner before respondent No.3 who had passed ejectment order vide LTR Case No.19/2024lPNK, dated 25.10.2024 and aggrieved by the same the petitioner filed a statutory appeal before respondent No.2.on 21.11.2024 along with stay application. But however no orders had been passed on the said stay application. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶34

4, This Court vide its order dated 1 6.L.2.2024 oassed interim orders in favour of the^petitioner observinq as u nder:

7

J

I

"Status-quo is directed to be maintaind in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0.30 guntas situated in Sy.No.17lAA/2 (t7/AA) at Bayyaram Village, Bhadradri Kothagudem District pursuant to the LTR Case No.19/2024/pNK, dated 25.10.2024 passed by the respondent No.3 tiil 05.01.2025."

¶39

PERUSED THE RECORD:

¶40

In compliance to the directions of this Court dated 76,L2.2024, the petitioner had taken personal notice to the respondent No.5 by Registered post with acknowledgment due and filed proof of service oF notice, upon the respondent No,5 into the registry vide memo dated 23.12.2024 and duly enclosing the original postal receipt and office copy of the legal notice and also postal track consignment evidencing the fact of service of notice on behalf of respondent No.5.

¶41

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that the limited grievance of the petitioner being inaction of the respondent No.2 in passing of orders in the stay application filed by the petitioner in the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner before respondent No.2 on 2L.11.2024 aggrieved against the ejectment order vide LTR

¶42

\

¶43

4

¶44

Case No.19/2024/PNK dated 25.1O.2024^{passed by} respondent No.3 herein, the writ^petition could be disposed of directinq respondent No.2 to dispose of either the^stay application or the statutory appeal itself^preferred by^the petitioner within a reasonable period, in accordance to law.

¶45

7 TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION:

¶46

a). The submission made by the learned counsel appearang on behalf of the^petitioner and^learned Assastant Government Pleader for Social Welfare, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3,

¶47

b). The fact borne on record that the^petitioner filed statutory appeal before respondent No.2 on 22.LL.2024 along with stay applacation, aggrieved against the ejectment orders^passed by respondent No.3 vide LTR Case No.Lg/2O24,/PNK dated 25.10.2024, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to dispose of on merits the statutory appeal itself preferred by the petitioner before respondent No.2 on 22.Lt.2024 along with stay application, aggrieved against the ejectment orders^passed by respondent No.3 rzide LTR Case No.Lg/2O24IPNK dal:ed 25.10.2024

¶48

)

¶49

within a peraod of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in accordance to taw, in conformity with the principtes of natural iustice by giving reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to both the petitioner and respondent No.5 as per the rules in force,

¶50

c). Till the above exercise is initiated and appropriate orders passed by respondent No.2 in the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner on 2L.L1.2O24 along with stay application aggrieved against the ejectment orders passed by respondent No.3 dated 25.LO.2O24 vide LTR Case No. No.l9/2O24lPNK as per the directions as issued as above within the time period as stapulated as above, the interim orders granted by this Court on L6.12.2O24 shall remain in force. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand

¶52

closed.

¶53

SD/.N.SRIHARI AS S I STAN1";i;EJ^bTRAR /

¶54

//TRUE^COPY// FICER S

¶55

To,

¶56

7