Telangana High Court

WP/22802/2010 of Jakka Ram Mohan Reddy Vs The Chairman, Zilla Praja Parishad, Nellore on 30 December 2014

Cites 0, Cited by 0

SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No. 22802 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “To issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI

WRIT PETITION No. 22802 of 2010

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“To issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature ofMandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action ofthe Respondents 1 and 2 in causing obstruction to the Petitionersfor approaching the National Highway No.5 through the Govt.porambok land from the site owned by the Petitioners as illegal,arbitrary and consequentially direct the Respondents not to makeany obstruction for using the approach road through the Govt.porambok land connecting to National Highway No.5 atChemudugunta Village, Venkatachalam Mandal, Sri PottiSreeramulu Nellore District.”

2. Heard Sri K. Ananda Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.C.H. Vedavani, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the 3[rd] respondent; apart fromperusing the material available before this Court.

3. According to the petitioners, they are the absolute owners andpossessors of the land admeasuring 4245.84 Sq.Yds. situated inS.No.314/B and 314/C of Chemudugunta village, Venkatachalammandal, SPS Nellore District, having purchased the same by way ofregistered Sale Deed dated 01.07.2008, bearing DocumentNo.2925/2008.

4. It is pleaded by the petitioners herein that to the East of the saidland, National Highway No.5 is passing and on the eastern side of thesite, some part is covered by compound wall and the remaining portion isvacant meant for approach road to the National Highway through theGovernment poramboke land. As per the petitioners, the said approachroad is being used by them to reach the National Highway for the pastforty years.

5. The grievance of the petitioners precisely in the present writ petition is, without any manner of right or authority, respondents 1 and 2 arecausing obstruction to the petitioners to reach National Highway throughthe Government poramboke land. It is pleaded by the petitioners that theygot issued a legal notice and also submitted representations dated14.05.2010 and 02.07.2010 to the respondents for redressal of theirgrievance and despite the same, the respondents 1 and 2 are obstructingtheir way.

6. This Court, on 14.09.2010, passed an interim order, directing therespondents not to close the approach road as access to the NationalHighway No.5

7. A counter affidavit is filed by the 2[nd] respondent, denying theaverments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in thedirection of justifying the impugned action.

8. This Court, by way of an order dated 23.12.2010, permitted the 3[rd]respondent to come on record. The affidavit filed in support of theimplead petition, WPMP No.36372 of 2010, completely denies theallegations in the writ affidavit. It is contended by the learned counsel forthe petitioners that the impugned action on the part of the respondents 1and 2 herein is highly arbitrary, illegal, unreasonable and violative ofArticle 14 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended by thelearned counsel that without any manner of right or authority, therespondents are interfering and causing obstruction to the petitionersherein to use the approach road to the National Highway.

9. Per contra, it is contended by the learned Standing Counsel for therespondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the 3[rd] respondent thatthere is no illegality nor any irregularity nor there is any statutory norconstitutional violation in the present matter; as such, the present writpetition is liable to be dismissed and the petitioners herein are not entitledfor any relief from this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the writ petition is also liable for dismissal onthe ground of suppression of material realities.

10. It is further submitted that the Z.P. High School, Chemudugunta was

constructed in Survey Nos. 313 and 314 and the construction ofcompound wall was taken up in the year 2001-02 and completed in theyear 2005 and nobody raised any objection while constructing thecompound wall. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s land is situatedin Survey No.314 which is not directly connected with National HighwayNo.5 and there is a 20 feet wide road to the North side of the petitioner’sland in the layout which is approved by the Gram Panchayat connectingthe land with NH5 through 30 feet wide road already existing on theNorth-East side of the petitioners’ land.

11. The material available before this Court manifestly discloses thatthere is absolutely no dispute with regard to the existence of the land ofthe petitioners in Survey No.314 of Chemudugunta village,Venkatachalam mandal, SPS Nellore district. The sole grievance of thepetitioners herein is that the respondents 1 and 2 are causing obstructionto use the approach road to reach National Highway No.5. As per thematerial available on record, a High School belonging to the ZillaParishad is existing in Survey Nos.313 and 314 and a compound wallwas also constructed in the year 2005; and there is also a road of 20 feetfor approach to the National Highway.

12. In the counter affidavit, the respondents herein have specificallydenied any obstruction by them. Added to that, the petitioners herein arerequesting this Court to make an enquiry with regard to the groundposition in respect of usage of the approach road. In the definite opinionof this Court, the same is not permissible under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. It is also a settled and well established propositionof law that when there are serious factual controversies for whichevidence is required to be let in, the jurisdiction of this Court under Article226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked.13. For the aforesaid reasons, and having regard to the nature ofcontroversy in the present writ petition, the writ petition is dismissed. Noorder as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shallstand closed.

30[th] December, 2014

KSM

______________________

JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead