Telangana High Court
WP/27925/2007 of B.Chenga Reddy (died) his LRs Vs The Commisssioner of Endowments Department, on 27 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.27925 of 2007 Dated: 27.12.2007 Between B. Chenga Reddy (died) his L.Rs. B.Rama Krishna Reddy and another. …Petitioners And The Commissioner of Endowments Department, Govt. of A.P., Boggulakunta, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.27925 of 2007
Dated: 27.12.2007
Between
B. Chenga Reddy (died) his L.Rs.
B.Rama Krishna Reddy and another.
…Petitioners
And
The Commissioner of Endowments Department,Govt. of A.P., Boggulakunta, Hyderabad and others.
…Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.27925 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 matter is coming up for admission.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also thelearned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments representingrespondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri V.T.M.Prasad, learned counselrepresenting respondent No.3.
The learned counsel for the petitioners had taken this Courtthrough the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitionand would submit that though the revision petition is pending beforethe first respondent, there is threat of dispossession. It is also broughtto the notice of this Court that similar matters had been disposed ofwith suitable directions.
This writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamusdeclaring the action of the third respondent in trying to destroy the cropand dispossess the petitioners though Revision Petition No.8 of 2003is pending before the first respondent, as arbitrary, illegal and void andto pass such other suitable orders.
Several facts had been narrated in the affidavit filed in supportof the writ petition.
Since it is stated that Revision Petition No.8 of 2003 is pendingdisposal before the first respondent, let the first respondent dispose ofthe same, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of acopy of this order. Till then, status quo, obtaining as on today, shall bemaintained.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be noorder as to costs.
Date: 27.12.2007va
_________________
P.S.Narayana, J