Telangana High Court
WP/33802/2010 of Velamati Ramesh Chandra Chowdry Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its on 31 December 2010
Mr. JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 33802 OF 2010 Dated: 31.12.2010 Between: Velamati Ramesh Chandra & Ors. ..... Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad & Anr. .....Respondents THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 33802 OF 2010 ORDER: With the
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
WRIT PETITION No. 33802OF 2010
Dated: 31.12.2010
Between:
Velamati Ramesh Chandra & Ors.
AND
..... Petitioner
The Government of Andhra PradeshHyderabad & Anr.
.....Respondents
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
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:
WRIT PETITION No. 33802 OF 2010
With the consent of Sri N. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for thepetitioners and Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned standing counsel forMunicipal Corporation, this writ petition is being disposed of at thestage of admission itself.
Petitioners claim to be the owners of 400 Sq. yards of house sitesituated in survey No. 2/C2 of Shanti Nagar area, Allipuram extensionward, Visakhapatnam. The said site is stated to have been purchasedby a sale deed bearing document No. 809/1993 dated 13.08.1993 bythe father of the petitioners, to which the petitioners being the legalrepresentatives have succeeded. The petitioners have been inpossession of the said site and paying the vacant land tax also to thesecond respondent. Intending to construct a house, the petitionerssubmitted an application and they also filed an application seekingregularization of the site under Land Regularization Scheme by payingnecessary amounts. The grievance of the petitioners is that theofficials of the 2[nd] respondent are entering the site and interfering withtheir possession and enjoyment without any manner of right. Thepetitioners are the lawful owners and possessors of the site and therespondent has no authority to disturb their possession for whateverreason except in accordance with law.
As seen from the pleadings, the short grievance of the petitionersis that their possession is being interfered with by the respondent without following due process of law.
That being the short grievance, this writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the 2[nd] respondent not to interfere/dispossess the petitionersfrom the aforesaid site except by due process of law. The writ petitionis accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Date: 31.12.2010
_______________NOUSHAD ALI, J
tsk