Telangana High Court
WP/17387/2010 of K. Mohammad Vs The District Collector on 31 December 2010
Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.17387 OF 2010 DATED: 31.12.2010 Between : K. Mohammed .. Petitioner And 1. The District Collector, Anantapur Anantapur District., and 3 others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.17387 OF 2010 ORDER : The
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINIWRIT PETITION No.17387 OF 2010
DATED: 31.12.2010
Between :
K. Mohammed .. Petitioner
And
1. The District Collector, Anantapur
Anantapur District., and 3 others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No.17387 OF 2010
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
The petitioner herein claims to be the absolute owner andpossessor of the land to an extent of Ac.7.67 in Sy.No.295 situated atKalluru Village, Kalluru Agraharam Fields, Garladinne RevenueMandal, Anantapur District. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by theinaction of the respondent in considering the petitioner’s request forissuance of ‘No Objection Certificate’ for registration of the above saidland.
It is not in dispute that the above said land was originallyassigned to one Yerra Boya Nallappa and ‘D’ form patta was grantedin his favour. However the petitioner claims that since the assignmenttook place prior to G.O.Ms.No.1142, dated 18.6.1954, there was noprohibition of alienation and thus the petitioner had acquired absolutetitle in respect of the said land notwithstanding that it was an assignedland.
A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1to 3 stating that after receiving the application of the petitioner, necessary enquiry at basic level was conducted and proposals into 3 stating that after receiving the application of the petitioner, necessary enquiry at basic level was conducted and proposals in favour of the petitioner were sent to the 1[st] respondent through theRevenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur on 29.11.2009 and the finalorder would be passed by the first respondent at the earliest.
Having regard to the stand taken by the respondents in theircounter-affidavit, no further enquiry is necessary and accordingly thewrit petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1[st] respondent topass appropriate orders on the application of the petitioner asexpeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks fromthe date of receipt of this order.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage ofadmission. No costs.
______________
G. ROHINI, J.
Dt. 31.12.2010 ISL/GBS