The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs. Nunna Keshava Rao
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Disposed
Before:
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar Mishra , Ninala Jayasurya
Listed On:
22 Jul 2022
Order Text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
W.A Nos. 204 and 212 of 2021
(Proceedings through physical mode)
W.A No. 204 of 2021:
| The State of Andhra<br>Pradesh,<br>Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Govt.,<br>Municipal Administration Department,<br>A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi,<br>Amaravathi, Guntur District and another. | Appellants |
|---|---|
| Versus | |
| Nunna Keshava Rao<br>S/o. Nagabhushana Rao, aged 55 years,<br>Occ:<br>Business, r/o. Amalapuram,<br>East Godavari District and others. | Respondents |
| Counsel for the Appellants | : G.P. for Municipal Administration &<br>Urban Development. |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>Nos.1<br>to 6 | : Mr. Balaji Medamalli |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>Nos.7 to 9 | : G.P. for Panchayath Raj and Rural<br>Development |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>No.10 | : Mr. Kasa Jagan Mohan Reddy,<br>Special Government Pleader |
| W.A No. 212<br>of 2021 | |
| Godavari Urban Development Authority,<br>Rep.by its Vice Chairman, Kakinada,<br>East Godavari District. | Appellant |
| Versus | |
| Nunna Keshava Rao<br>S/o. Nagabhushana Rao, aged 55 years,<br>Occ: Business, r/o. Amalapuram,<br>East Godavari District and others. | Respondents |
| Counsel for the Appellant | : Mr. Kasa Jagan<br>Mohan Reddy<br>Special Government Pleader |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>Nos.1 to 6 | : Mr. Balaji Medamalli |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>Nos.7&9 | : G.P. for Municipal Administration &<br>Urban Development. |
| Counsel for Respondent<br>Nos.8,10&11 | : G.P. for Panchayath Raj and Rural<br>Development |
COMMON JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Dt: 22.07.2022
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
Both these writ appeals are directed against the order dated 09.12.2020 in W.P. No.5808 of 2020 passed by the learned single Judge wherein the issue concerning inclusion of certain hamlets/villages in the Godavari Urban Development Authority was involved.
-
Learned Advocate General would submit that after the impugned order was passed by the learned single Judge, the Godavari Urban Development Authority has been divided into two separate Urban Development Authorities i.e., Kakinada Urban Development Authority and Rajahmundry Urban Development Authority. In this view of the matter, learned Advocate General would submit that the factual foundation in the cause agitated before the writ court is not in existence, therefore, the proceedings of the writ appeals may be closed leaving open the principles on the basis of which the learned single Judge has rendered verdict, to be decided in appropriate proceedings.
-
In view of the statement made, the writ appeals are closed leaving open the legal issues and the interpretations of the provisions contained in Andhra Pradesh (Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities) Act, 2016, which have been dealt with by the learned single Judge, for adjudication in appropriate proceedings.
-
No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J
2
GM
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE &
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
W.A Nos. 204 and 212 of 2021
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
Dt: 22.07.2022
GM
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order