Telangana High Court
WP/28087/2008 of Guvvala Laxmi Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, 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 GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 28087 of 2008 Between: 1 Guvvala Laxmi D/o.Late Nagaiah R/o.Yatapaka vilage
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENTTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADAWRIT PETITION NO : 28087 of 2008
Between:
1 Guvvala Laxmi D/o.Late Nagaiah
R/o.Yatapaka vilage Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 2 Nitta Parvathi W/o.Rambbu R/o.Yatapaka vilage Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 3 Kurnala Muthamma W/o.Venkanna R/o.Yatapaka vilage Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 4 Nune Seetharavamma W/o.Venkaiah R/o.Rayanypeta village Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 5 Kalabathuni Achamma W/o.Venkaiah R/o.Yatapaka village Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 6 Putti Venkata Krishna LR of P.Nagaratnam S/o.Rangaiah R/o.Yatapaka village Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District 7 Putti Srnivasa Rao LR of N.Ngaratnam S/o.Rangaiah R/o.Yatapaka village Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District R/o.Yatapaka village Bhadrachalam Mandal,Khammam District
.....
PETITIONER(S)
AND
1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its PrincipalSecretary, Tribal Welfare DepartmentSecretary, Tribal Welfare Department secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Additional to Government & Project Officer ITDA,Bhadrachalam,Khammam DistrictBhadrachalam,Khammam District 3 The Agency Divisonal Officer, Bhadrachalam Bhadrachalam,Khammam DistrictKhammam District 4 The Tahsildar,Bhadrachalam Mandal Khammam District
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the HighCourt will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction moreparticularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the actionof the 1st respondent in not passing the orders either on the staypetition or on the main Appeal filed by the petitioners against the orders inCMA.No.291 of 2007 on the file of the Additional Agent otGovernment-cum-Project officer, ITDA Bhadrachalam, KhammamDistrict dated 21.6.2008 served on the petitioners on 31.10.2008 byconfirming the orders passed by the Agency Divisional Officer,Bhadrachalam, in LTR Case No.4/BCM/2004 dated 21.11.2006 isillegal, and void and opposed to Articles, 14,19,21 and 300-A of theConstitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents notto interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of thepetitioner land situated in SY.No.179/8P,179/12A,179/12AA,179/13A,179/13A, 179/13AA,179/15 to an extent of Ac.4.59 cents ofYetapaka village, Bhadrachalam Mandal, Khammam District.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MUMMANENI.SRINIVASA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFAREThe 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 has been filed by the petitioners, whoare seven in number, assailing the inaction of the 1[st] respondentin considering the revision filed by them against the order dated21.5.2008 passed in CMA No.291 of 2007.
The petitioners claim to be the owners and possessorsof Acs.4-59 cents of land comprising Sy.No.179/8P,179/12A, 179/12AA, 179/13A, 179/13AA, 179/15 of YetapakaVillage, Bhadrachalam Mandal. Proceedings have been initiatedfor ejectment on 21.11.2006 by the 3[rd] respondent, who is theprimary authority, on the ground that their possession is incontravention ofAndhra Pradesh Schedule Areas Land TransferRegulation 1 of 1959, as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970. Questioning the same, they filed an appeal before the AdditionalAgent to the Government, Project Officer, ITDA, Bhadrachalam-2[nd] respondent. The appellate authority, on reconsidering thematerial placed on record, did not find any valid ground tointerfere with the order passed by the primary authority andaccordingly, dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, they filed revision
Arguments
before the 1[st] respondent and also moved stay application. There being no action by the 1[st] respondent on the revision aswell as the stay application, they approached this Court invokingthe jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitionersand the learned Government Pleader for Social Welfareappearing on behalf of R1 to R3 and the learned GovernmentPleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of R4.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitsthat the respondents are contemplating to dispossess thepetitioners from the land in dispute pending revision.
The factual aspect of the petitioners filing revision beforethe 1[st] respondent is not in dispute.
In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the 1[st] respondent to consider the revision filed by thepetitioners and pass appropriate orders within a period of eightweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pendingconsideration of the said revision, the respondents shall notinterfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the landin question. No costs.
__________