Telangana High Court
WP/14413/2002 of Golla Bhemalingappa, Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer, on 29 December 2009
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.14413 OF 2002 Dt.29.12.2009 Between: G. Bhemalingappa … Petitioner And The Mandal Revenue Officer Asapari Mandal, Asapari, Kurnool
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.14413 OF 2002
Dt.29.12.2009
Between:G. Bhemalingappa … Petitioner
And
The Mandal Revenue OfficerAsapari Mandal, Asapari, Kurnool Districtand others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.14413 OF 2002
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 for a Mandamus to declare the action ofthe respondents in laying a road in patta land of the petitionercomprised in S.No.132/1 of Chirumanudoddi Village, Asapari Mandal,Kurnool District, as illegal and arbitrary.
Heard Sri T. Narasimha Chary, representing Sri P. GangaramiReddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record.
While the petitioner apprehended that over an extent of Ac.6.97cents of the land in the above mentioned survey number, whichallegedly belongs to him, at the instance of the villagers, respondentNo.1 was proposing to lay a road, in the counter affidavit filed byrespondent No.1 it is stated that a cart track is already in existenceover the said land and that there are no proposals to form a new road. Having regard to this stand, it is clear that the apprehension of thepetitioner that respondent No.1 is proposing to lay a road, is notcorrect. The questions whether there is a cart track over the landcomprised in S.Nos.132/1, 158, 161 and 166 of ChirumanudoddiVillage and whether the villagers are entitled to use the alleged carttrack, are the matters which require to be adjudicated by a competentCivil Court.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of by placing on recordthe statement of respondent No.1 that no fresh road is proposed to belaid over the land in dispute. The petitioner is given liberty to approachthe competent Civil Court, if he disputes the right of the villagers to usea part of his land as cart track.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P. No.18014of 2002 and W.V.M.P. No.3730 of 2003, filed by the respective parties,are disposed of as infructuous.
29.12.2009
______________________C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
bnr