Telangana High Court
WP/28063/2007 of Virupakshi Siddamma D/o V. Gurava Reddy Vs the Government of andhra Pradesh, rep by its on 28 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.28063 of 2007 Between: Virupakshi Siddamma and another. .. PETITIONERS and The Government of A.P. and another. .. RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.28063 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioners question the orders of
Between:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No.28063 of 2007
Virupakshi Siddamma and another.
.. PETITIONERS
and
The Government of A.P. and another.
.. RESPONDENTS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No.28063 of 2007
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 petitioners question the orders of the 2[nd] respondent inproceedings in Roc.Nos.A/614/2007, dated 31-08-2007, in cancelling DKTpattas granted in favour of V.Erraka, who is the mother of the 1[st] petitionerand B.Venkataswamy Reddy in respect of the lands admeasuring Ac.3-17cents and Ac.0-72 cents in Sy.Nos.333/2B, 334/2B and 334/3A1 situated atChandragiri Village and Mandal, Chittoor District.
It is stated that the said cancellation orders have been communicatedto both the petitioners herein. It is stated that DKT patta holders or their legalheirs are entitled for compensation/ex-gratia in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1307,dated 23-12-1993. Further, as per the larger Bench judgment of this Court inLAO-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Chavella Division, Hyderabad Vs.
Mekala Pandu[[1]]the DKT patta holders or their legal heirs not only entitledfor ex-gratia/compensation but also entitled for solatium, additionalcompensation and interest.
Anyhow, I am not inclined to consider those contentions as admittedly,the petitioners are not seeking any compensation, but they are aggrieved bythe impugned orders, dated 31-08-2007, on the ground that the lands inquestion are not Government lands but they are patta lands inherited fromtheir ancestors.
Admittedly, an appeal lies to the Revenue Divisional Officer againstthe said impugned orders, dated 31-08-2007. Therefore, I am of the opinionthat it is just and proper to permit the petitioners to file an appeal before theRevenue Divisional Officer.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, thepetitioners are permitted to file an appeal before the Revenue DivisionalOfficer within ten days from today against the orders of the Tahsildar inproceedings in Roc.Nos.A/614/07, dated 31-08-2007. If any such appeal isfiled within ten days from today, status-quo obtaining as on today with regardto the possession of the lands in question shall be maintained.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order asto costs.
___________
Note:Issue C.C. by Monday (B/o) Prv
[1]2004 (2) ALD 451 (LB)