Telangana High Court
WP/28143/2008 of Tumati Vinayakudu Vs The AP State Financial Corporation, rep.by its on 24 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO:28143 of 2008 Between: Tumati Vinayakudu S/o.Tumati Venkata Narsaiah R/o.West
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
WRIT PETITION NO:28143of2008
Between:
Tumati Vinayakudu S/o.Tumati Venkata Narsaiah R/o.West Veerayapalem village Kurichedu Mandal, PrakasamDistrict
..... PETITIONER
AND
The AP State Financial Corporation, rep.by its Branch Manager, 2nd Lane, Bhagyanagar,Ongole Prakasam District
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying thatin the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Courtwill be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus declaring theimpugned Notification published by the respondent corporation inSaakshi Telugu Daily Newspaper dated 23.10.2008 inviting sealedtenders-cum--bids in so far as agricultural land admeasuring Ac.2.00situated in Sy.No.452/1 of West Veerayapalem village,KuricheduMandalam,PRakasam District shown at item No.3 under additionalsecurity is concerned as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisionsof State Finance Corporation Act, 1951 and consequently set aside thesame.
Counsel for the Petitioner:K.ARUNA
Counsel for the Respondent: MR.M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
The Court 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:
This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring theimpugned notification published by the respondent Corporation inSaakshi Telugu Daily Newspaper on 23.10.2008 inviting sealedtenders-cum-bids insofar as agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.00situated in Survey No.452/1 of West Veerayapalem Village, KuricheduMandal, Prakasam District, shown at item No.3 under additionalsecurity, is concerned, as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to theprovisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Act,1951 (for short ‘the Act’).
It appears, the complaint of the petitioner is that he is theabsolute owner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuringAcs.2.06 cents situated in Survey No.452/1 of West VeerayapalemVillage, Kurichedu Mandal, Prakasam District having purchased thesame from it’s lawful owner by virtue of sale deed bearing documentNo.1610 of 2001, dated 22.06.2001. According to the petitioner, therespondent Corporation distributed pamphlets on 20.12.2008 whereinit was mentioned that it invited sealed tenders-cum-bids and that it hasalready got published notification in Saakshi Telugu Daily Newspaperon 23.10.2008. Further, he is not aware of the fact that his vendor hasmortgaged this property as a collateral security for the loans obtainedby some third parties. Therefore, even otherwise, the notice publishedin the Telugu Daily Newspaper shows that the Corporation is proceeding under Section 29 of the Act, according to which, theCorporation cannot proceed against the properties of the guarantor orthe purchaser of the property from such guarantor.
There is no necessity of going into all the details.
Sri M.S.Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel appearing for therespondent, on instructions, stated that the Corporation could not haveproceeded with under Section 29 of the Act in respect of the property ofthe petitioner i.e. Acs.2.00 of land situated in Survey No.452/1 of WestVeerayapalem Village, Kurichedu Mandal, Prakasam District shownas item No.3, published in the notification in Saakshi Telugu Dailynewspaper on 23.10.2008 and, therefore, the impugned notification isnot valid insofar as the said item.
Procedure
In view of the submissions made by the learned counselappearing for the respondent, the writ petition is disposed of holdingthat insofar as item No.3, which relates to the property of the petitioneri.e. Acs.2.00 of land situated in Survey No.452/1 of WestVeerayapalem Village, Kurichedu Mandal, Prakasam District, isconcerned, the impugned notification is illegal and, therefore, the sameis set aside. However, this will not preclude the Corporation fromproceeding against the property in question as per law. No costs.
________________
24[th] DECEMBER, 2008
Note: issue copy in three days. B/o
kvni