Telangana High Court
WP/11895/2010 of M.Yerriswamy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No. 11895 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, apart from perusing the material available before this Court. 2. According to the petitioner, he is the owner and
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI
WRIT PETITION No. 11895 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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedGovernment Pleader for the respondents, apart from perusing the materialavailable before this Court.
2. According to the petitioner, he is the owner and possessor of thelands, admeasuring Ac.1-08 cents in Survey No.161 and Ac.7-18 cents inSurvey No.162 situated at Kadimi village, Ananthapur Rural mandal,Ananthapur district, and the said lands have been in possession of thepetitioner for several decades. It is also pleaded that the revenueauthorities issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in favour of thepetitioner.
3. The grievance precisely in the present writ petition is that therespondents 2 and 3 herein, without any manner of right, are attempting tolay road through the lands of the petitioner, without following due processof law and without initiating proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act.
4. No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents, denying theaverments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, or in thedirection of justifying the impugned action. In the absence of any counter,resisting the averments in the writ affidavit, this Court has no other optionexcept to dispose of the writ petition basing on the material availablebefore the Court.
5. The title deed which is placed on record along with the writ petitioncategorically discloses that the subject properties are standing in thename of the petitioner. The said revenue records prima facie show thatthe petitioner herein is in possession and enjoyment of the property. There is also a statutory presumption under the provisions of the A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 in favour of thepetitioner. In the considered opinion of this Court, the private lands ofindividuals cannot be taken away without recourse to law.
6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed,directing the respondents herein not to undertake any activity in thesubject lands without issuing notice and without initiating proceedings asper law. It is also made clear that the respondents herein are entitled toproceed in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shallstand closed.
______________________
JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI
30[th] December, 2014
KSM