Telangana High Court
WP/33533/2010 of Kankipati Koteswaramma Vs The Additional Agent to the Government, on 30 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.33533 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for the respondents. Petitioner claims ownership and possession over the land admeasuring 0.53
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.33533 of2010
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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedAssistant Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for therespondents.
Petitioner claims ownership and possession over the landadmeasuring 0.53 hectares and 0.35 hectares covered by SurveyNo.85/3 and 96/2 respectively situated at Indukurupeta Village,Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District. On filing complaint by thefourth respondent – Special Deputy Tahsildar (Tribal Welfare),Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District, proceedings wereinitiated by the second respondent – Agency Divisional Officer,Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District, for eviction of thepetitioner under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land TransferRegulation 1 of 1959 as amended by Regulation 1 of 1970 and thesecond respondent by order, dated 27.07.2010, passed inL.T.R.P.No.146 of 2007, ordered for eviction of the petitioner anddirected the third respondent - Tahsildar, Devipatnam Mandal, EastGodavari District, to take the land into Government custody so as toassign the same to eligible tribals. It is stated that as against the saidorder, the petitioner carried the matter by way of appeal before the firstrespondent – Additional Agent to the Government,Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District, on 01.12.2010 and suchappeal is pending. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though shehas filed application in the aforesaid appeal, seeking interim orders, noorders are passed on such application and the respondents are takingsteps for eviction of the petitioner.
As per the Regulation referred to above, against the order ofeviction, there is substantive remedy of appeal provided to the firstrespondent. When such remedy is availed by the petitioner by way ofappeal and an application is filed therein seeking interim orders, thereis no reason for not considering such application for this long time. Asmuch as the petitioner is claiming ownership and possession over thepetition schedule property and the appeal filed by her is pendingconsideration before the first respondent, I deem it appropriate to directthe first respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioneras expeditiously as possible. Further, the order of eviction, dated27.07.2010, passed by the second respondent in L.T.R.P.No.146 of2007 shall remain suspended pending disposal of such appeal. Thereshall be a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner tocultivate the land in question till disposal of such appeal.
Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.No order as to costs.
_______________________
R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
30[th] DECEMBER, 2010.kvni