Shaik Ranthu Bee vs. The Stae Of Ap
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Disposed
Before:
Hon'ble Ninala Jayasurya
Listed On:
5 Dec 2022
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION No.37249 OF 2022
Between:-
Shaik Ranthu Bee, W/o.Pedda Kalesha
and
… Petitioner
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and others
… Respondents
| Counsel for the petitioner | : | Mr.Dhanunjaya Baru |
|---|---|---|
| Counsel for R.1 to R.7 | : | The G.P. for Revenue |
| Counsel for respondent No.8 | : | The G.P. for Home |
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 7 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent No.8.
- The grievance of the writ petitioner in the present writ petition, in short, is that the respondents are trying to demarcate the petitioner's land in an extent of Acs.2.50 cents in survey No.234/3 of Budawada Revenue Village, Marripadu Mandal, S.P.S.R. Nellore District and insisting the petitioner to vacate the same, without following the procedure established in law and the same is illegal, violative of the petitioner's rights
guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300–A of the Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks a consequential direction to the respondents not to demarcate the subject matter land or dispossess the petitioner by interfering in any manner with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same.
-
Learned counsel for the petitioner, while advancing arguments with reference to various averments made in the writ petition and material on record including the earlier orders passed in Writ Petition No.14444 of 2021, dated 26.7.2021, submits that even on the earlier occasion, attempts were made to interfere with the petitioner's property. He further submits that despite the directions of this Court not to dispossess the petitioner except by due process of law, the respondents are making efforts to interfere with the petitioner's property by adopting different methods and by circumventing the earlier orders. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner, having left with no other alternative, is constrained to approach this Court seeking appropriate directions.
-
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on the other hand, placed a copy of the instructions dated 03.12.2022 received from the 4th respondent for perusal of this Court wherein it is stated that the petitioner is having Acs.2.50
2
cents of land in survey No.234–3 in Budawada Revenue Village, that as per sub-division the pattadars in survey No.234–3 are enjoying their lands peacefully and that no one is trying to demarcate the petitioner's schedule property and insisting to vacate from the landed property in an extent of Acs.2.50 cents in survey No.234–3. In the instructions, it further stated that if any objections are there over the sub-division, the petitioner may approach the higher authorities in Revenue and Survey departments.
-
In view of the above stated instructions, which are placed on the record, this Court deems it not necessary to go into merits or otherwise of the case.
-
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, by providing that the petitioner may seek recourse to law in the event the respondents are resorting to any action in respect of the subject matter property, without following due procedure as contemplated under law. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J
December 05, 2022. vasu