Telangana High Court
WP/8109/1996 of Addanki Venkata Rao Vs Govt of A.P., rep by its Secretary, on 26 December 2005
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 8109 of 1996 Between: Addanki Venkata Rao S/o Veerabhadra Rao Balantaram (V),
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU
WRIT PETITION NO : 8109 of 1996
Between:
Addanki Venkata Rao S/o Veerabhadra RaoBalantaram (V), Ramachandrapuram (M),East Godavari Dist.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1 Govt of A.P., rep by its Secretary, Revenue (Endowments II)
Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2 District Collector
Kakinada, East Godavari Dist.
3 Revenue Divisional Officer
Rajahmundry, East Godavari Dist.
4 Mandal Revenue Officer
K.Gangavaram, East Godavari Dist.
5 Sri Raja Rajeswari Agastyeswara Swamy Devasthanam, rep by its ExecutiveOfficer, Balantaram, East Godavari Dist.Officer, Balantaram, East Godavari Dist.
.....RESPONDENTS
The Court made the following:
W.P. No. 8109 of 1996CYS,J.
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.
ORAL ORDER:
Alleging that Ac.2.26 cents of land in S.Nos. 171/1, 171/14 and 171/15 situatedin Balantaram village, which are in his possession as a tenant, are proposed tobe acquired by the Government, petitioner filed this writ petition.
On behalf of the respondents, the Mandal Revenue Officer, K.GangavaramMandal (4[th] respondent) filed counter affidavit, inter alia, contending that thereare no proposals to acquire the land, which is in the possession of thepetitioner and that no draft notification or draft declarations have been issued.
In view thereof, the petition is dismissed as unnecessary. However, if andwhen the Government makes any proposals in this regard, the petitioner is atliberty to approach the Court for appropriate directions or reliefs. No order as tocosts.
26-12-2005
Kvsn
---------------------------
C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J.