Telangana High Court
WP/25246/2004 of N. Bikshpathi S/o late Rajalingam Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, on 31 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 25246 of 2004 Between: 1. N.Bikshapathi, S/o late Rajalingam, Urusu village, Warangal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 25246 of 2004
Between:1. N.Bikshapathi, S/o late Rajalingam, Urusu village, Warangal District. 2. N. Samaiah, S/o late Rajalingam, Urusu village, Warangal, District.3. Gayini Swaroopa, W/o Srinivasulu, Urusu village, Warangal District.4. Rangu Eshwaramma, W/o Rajaiah, Urusu village, Warangal District.5. Baigani Lalitha, W/o Bikshapathi, Urusu village, Warangal District......PETITIONERSAND
The Mandal Revenue Officer, Warangal Mandal, Warangal.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent more so particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in interfering withthe peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in respect of the land to anextent of Ac.0.17 Gts each in total admeasuring Ac.2.05 Gts in Survey No.213/B ofUrusu village, Warangal District when the petitioners are recorded as owners andpossessors of said land in the Record of Rights prepared and maintained as per theprovisions of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 in respect; ofUrusu village, Warangal District, as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and alsoin violation of principles of natural justice and as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of theConstitution of India.
For the Petitioner: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD, Advocate For the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court at the stage of admission made the following:
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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleaderfor Revenue and with their consent the writ petition is finally disposed of at the stageof admission.
Petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 claim to be absolute owners of Ac.3-00 of land, each havingAc.0-17 guntas in the family settlement, situated in Survey No.213/B of Urusu villageof Warangal District. They state that their names were entered in Record and Rightsprepared and maintained under the provisions of A.P. Rights in Land and PattadarPass Books Act, 1971 as owners and possessors in respect of the land, and passbooks were also issued to them. They also state that the respondent and his menhave tried to dispossess them from the land stating that the land was declared asexcess as per the declaration filed by one late N. Rajalingam, son of Muthaiah.According to them, the said N. Rajalingam was neither the pattadar of SurveyNo.213/B nor had he got any right to file a declaration under Urban Land Ceiling Act.Since, it is stated, they are rightful owners having got the land from one N.Jaganadham, son of Kattamallu who was the original pattadar thereof, therespondent without giving any prior notice, has no right to interfere with theirpossession over the land. Hence, the writ petition.
Taking over possession of any land which is declared as excess as per theprovisions of Urban Land Ceiling Act, shall only be after following the due process contemplated under the said Act, in that, the respondent shall issue notice to thepetitioners who are stated to be owners and possessors of the land, calling for theirexplanation, after considering the explanation that may be submitted by them, passappropriate orders, and till such exercise is undertaken, status quo obtaining as ontoday shall be maintained by the parties as regards the possession of thepetitioners. If the respondent has already followed the due process of law in thematter, he is at liberty to take consequential steps in accordance with the decisionhe has taken.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
Sd/-B.V.S.SAI PRASAD
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
SECTION OFFICER
To
1. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Warangal Mandal, Warangal
Conclusion
2. Two C.Cs to the Governnment Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings,A.P.,Hyderabad (OUT).A.P.,Hyderabad (OUT).
3. Two C.D.copies
4. One cc to r.V.T.M.Prasad,Advocate (OPUC)
TRk
HIGH COURT
DATED: 31.12.2004
ORDER:
W.P.NO.25246 OF 2004
DISPOSING OF THE WPAT THE ADMISSION STAGE