Telangana High Court
WP/27705/2007 of B. Narendra Kumar S/o Late Bala Bheemappa Vs The Executive Engineer, Srirama Reddy on 28 December 2007
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTYEIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA * * * WRIT PETITION No.27705 of 2007 Between: B. Narenra Kumar & Ors. …
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)FRIDAY, THE TWENTYEIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN
P R E S E N TTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA* * *WRIT PETITION No.27705 of 2007Between:
B. Narenra Kumar & Ors. … Petitioners Versus The Executive Engineer,Srirama Reddy Water Supply Project,RWS Kalyandurg,Ananthapur & Anr. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI A. BHASKARACHARI
Counsel for the Respondents: GOVT.PLEADER FORIRRIGATION AND COMMAND AREA
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA* * *
WRIT PETITION No.27705 of 2007
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.
O R D E R :
Heard Sri A.Bhaskarachari, the counsel representing thewrit petitioner as well as the learned Asst.Govt.Pleader forIrrigation.
2. The learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Irrigation had takennotice on 26-12-2007 to get instructions. It is stated before thisCourt that the present writ petition is filed only on apprehension.
3. Sri Bhaskarachari, the learned counsel for the petitionerhad taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed insupport of the writ petition and would submit that without issuingany notice and without following any procedure, the possessionof the petitioners relating to the subject matter of this writ petitionis being disturbed.
4. It is stated that the second and third petitioners gotagricultural land in an extent of Ac:1-87 2/3 in S.No.274-1 andAc:4-12 in S.No.298 of Kalyandurg and all the petitioners are injoint possession and enjoyment of the lands. In recognition oftheir title and possession, the Revenue Department issued Pattedar Passbook Nos. 102, 103 and 144 respectively in theirfavour in accordance with the ROR Act.
5. It is further stated that the respondents are now diggingtrench on the roadside of the petitioners land and from yesterdayi.e., 23-12-2007 the respondents are further proceeding with thedigging activity across the lands of the petitioners withoutfollowing any procedure.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances, it is needless tosay that the respondents are bound to follow the due process oflaw before disturbing such possession of the writ petitioners inrelation to their private lands in question.
7. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the respondents not to disturb the possession of thepetitioners relating to the subject-matter of the writ petition unlessand until due process of law is followed.
8. The writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
No costs.
JUSTICE P . S .
NARAYANA .
28/12/2007.
NB:
1) Operative Portion of the Order by wire at party’s costs.
2) Furnish CC of the order tomorrow.
B/o. ISL