Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Cuddapah Anr vs Penugonda Siva Prasad, Cuddapah Town ... on 28 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUS
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
I
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHA
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NOS: 20.19. 21. 24, 25, 26. 27. 29. 31 OF
2016. AND 1, 2. 3. 5. 7. 9.11.12, 13, 17. 18, 24, 25, 28, 30. 32 OF 2017.
AND1 & 2 OF 2024
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 20 OF 2016
APHC010640332016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P.No. 8/2009, dated 25.07.2013.
Between:
Shaik Masthan Vali, Son of Hussain Saheb, Resident of Municipal
Workers Colony, Nalfacheruvu, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Petitioner
AND
1. Kummaru Durga, Wife of Sreenu
2. Choopavarapu Nagamma, Wife of Kondaiah,
3. Kamineni Nagamani, Wife of Veeresvyamy^
-<?
(Respondents 1 to 3
are residents of Venkateswara Colony (now
unofficially named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony, Old
Guntur, Guntur JCJC)
4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Re presented by District Collector, having
Office at Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
5. The Registrar General High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Nelapadu,
Amaravathi, Guntur District.
(Impleaded the High Court of Andhra Pradesh through Registrar
General vide Court Order dated 02.04.2025 in LGA.No.20 of 2016.)
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: Sri Dammalapati Srinivas Advocate
General for the State of A.P.
Counsel for the Respondent No.5: Sri Vivek Chandra Sekhar Standinq
Counsel for A.P High Court
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 19 OF 2016
APHC010571682016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, Aggrieved by the Judgment and decree passed by the Special by the
Special Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (prohibition) Act cum-Principal District
Judge: Nellore in i_.o •O.P. 7 of 1S94 dated 18.11.2010.
Between:
1. Meriga Mallikarjunaiah, S/o. Chenchaiah, Age: 40 years, R/o. Plot.No
4, Layout plan No. 103/88, Near Kranthi Nagar, Dargamitta. Nellore.
3
l.
...Appellant
AND
1. Gorla Kousalyamma, W/o. Rami Reddy, Age: 55 years.
2. Goria Prabhakar Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy Working as Cashier in
Andhra Bank,
(Both are residents of Saraswathi Nagar, Dargamitta, Nellore).
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Sarva Bhouma Rao
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 21 OF 2016
APHC010357592016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P.No. 10/2009, dated 25.07.2013.
Between:
1. Shaik Sulthan, Son of Hussain, Resident D.No. 24-27-41, India Gnadhi
Nagar, 16/2, Nallachervu, Guntur, Guntur District.
...Appellant/Applicant
AND
1. Kanchala Venkayamma, Wife of Balaswamy,
2. Katta Devi, Wife of Janardhanachari,
3. Burri Samarajyanr, Wife of Samuel
(Respondents 1 to 3
are residents of Venkateswara Colony (now
unofficially named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony, Old
Guntur, Guntur JCJC)
4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector having
Office at Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur District.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 24 OF 2016
APHC010796772016
050
'.r
0^1
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the Special Tribunal (District Court , Krishna,
Machilipatnam) in O.P No.356/2008 dt: 22.07.2013.
Between:
1. Annabthina China Madhava Rao, S/o Tirapathaiah, aged about 44
years, R/o D.No.76-6-83, Bhagatsingh Road, Bhavanipuram
Vijayawada-12, Krishna District
2. Ghanta Venkata Rao, S/o Nagabhushanam aged about 39 years, R/o
76-9-5A, Municipal School Street, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada . Krishna
District
3. Yerramreddy Nageswara Rao, S/o China Nagireddy, aged about 36
years, R/o 76-8-5/4, Crambwav Road, Bhavanipu.ram, Vdjayawada,
Krishna District.
r- :
4. Yerramredclv Brahmareddy, S/o China Nagireddy, aged about 20 years,
R/o 76-8-18/2, Mainampatti vari street, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada,
Krishna District.
5. Challa Mohana Rao (died)
6. Adusumilli Ramanamma, W/o Venkata Ramanaiah, aged about 47
years,R/o 76-14-243/1A, Teachers' Colony, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada,
Krishna District.
7. Ghanta Aruna, W/o Veera Raghavaiah, aged about 42 years, R/o 76-
8/1-8, Bhagatsingh Road, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada -12, Krishna
District
8. Pathi Ankamma, W/o Ranga Rao, aged about 41 years, R/o
Bhagatsingh Road, Bhavanipuram, Krishna District
9. Challa Sugunamma, W/o Mohana Rao, aged about 42 years, R/o
D.No.76-9-14/2, ARM Road, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada -12, Krishna
District
10. Challa Chandra Babu Naidu, S/o Mohana Rao, aged about 25 years,
R/o D.No.76-9-14/2,ARM Road, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, Krishna
District
11.Challa Naga Chandana, D/o Mohana Roa, aged about 22 years, R/o
D.No.76-9- 14/2, ARM Road, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, Krishna
District
(Petitioners 9 to 11 were added as legal representatives of the
deceased 5th petitioner)
...Appellants/Petitioners
AND
1. Padala Sanjeeva Rao, S/o not known, aged 50 years
2. S Sanjeev, S/o.not known, aged about 54 years
3. Gundu Appalakonda, S/o. not known, aged about 66 years
4. Padala Narayana Rao, S/o. not known, aged about 63 years..
5. Padala Appaia Raju. S/o. not known, aged about 50 Years
6. Ramisetty Surya Rao, S/o. not known, aged 40 years
7. A.Narayana Rao, S/o. not known, aged about 57 years
8. Gundu Venkata Rao, S/o. not known, aged about 50 years
9. Padala Hamsa, W/o. not known, aged about 40 years
10.B Srinivasa Rao, S/o. not known, aged about 50 years
H.Pasupuleti Sanyasi Rao, S/o Not Known, aged 51 years
12.K Venkata Rao, S/o. not known, aged about 47 years
13.Gundala Srinu, S/o Not Known, aged 35 years
14.Sundara Govindamma, W/o.Narayana Rao, aged about 50 years
15. Ramisetty Gopi, S/o Not Known, aged 30 years
16. Ramisetty Kondala Rao. S/o Not Known, aged 34 years
17.Sankabathula Nageswara Rao, S/o Saryam, aged 42 years
IS.Rachamalla Venkateswara Babu, S/o. not known, aged about 54 years
19.Korakula Appaia Raju, S/o. not known, aged about 47 years
20.Asha Begum, Dio Not Known, aged 35 years
21.Syed Rizvan, S/o. not known, aged about 50 years
22.Mekala Raju, S/o Suryanarayana, aged 40 years
23.Gundu Appaia Raju, S/o Not Known, aged 42 years
-- ^
24. K r^arasimha Rao, S/o Not Known, aged 41 years
25.Gundu Narasimham, S/o. not known, aged about 53 years
26. R Ramu, S/o. not known, aged about 46 years
27.MarampudtTatatu, S/o Not Known, aged 42 nears
28.Parimi Sayamma, W/o. not known, aged about 54 years
29. R Babu Rao, S/o Not Known, aged 40 years
30.G Guravaiah, S/o Not Known, aged 41 years
31.Allam Satyavati, W/o Govind, aged 35 years
32. Md Lateef, S/o. not known, aged about 46 years
33. P Krishna, S/o Not Known, aged 28 years
34.Sanakabathula Sanyasamma, W/o Appa Rao, aged 29 Years
35.Palfa Appala Raju, S/o Narasaiah, aged 47 years
36. Shake Abdul Rahirn, S/o Not Known, aged 38 years
37.Enturi Appala Raju, S/o. not known, aged about 55 years
38.R Annonarrmia, W/o. not known, aged about 39 years
39.V Durga Rao, S/o Not Known, aged 45 years
40. A Narasimha Rao, S/o Not Known, aged 38 years
41.Padala Venkata Rao, S/o. Not known, aged about 53 years
42. L Suseela, W/o. Not known, aged about 57 years
43.Gundu Venkata Rao, S/o. Narayana Swamy, aged- about 55 years
44.SivaMnga Parvathi, W/o. Chinna Rao, aged about 57 Years
45.Ravisetti Surya Rao, W/o. Kannayya, aged about 22 years
8
46.Padala Narayana Rao, S/o. Satyam, aged about 23 years
47.Padala Appala Raju, S/o. Narayana Rao, aged about 21 years
48.Gundu Appala Konda, S/o. Kondappa. aged about 58 Years
49.Sudabathula Sanjeevi, S/o. Ramulu, aged about 61 years
SO.Padala Sanjeevi, S/o. Satyam, aged about 54 years
51.Vis\A/anadha Appa Rao, S/o. Venkanna. aged about 52 years
(All are coolies. R/o.H.No.76-6-37/2, Bhavanipuram. Municipal Ward
No.4, Bhagatsingh Road, Vijaya\A^ada, Krishna District.)
...Respondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 R/w Section 151 of C.P.C.. praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in ssuDDort of the oetition the
rligh Court may be pleased to grant interim injunction restraining the
Respondents from making any kind of constructions over the Petition
Schedule Property in LGOP. No, 356/2008 on the file of the Special Tribunal
(District Court. Krishna, Machilipatnam) or any part thereof or change the
physical features pending disposal of the above Appeal.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri VV L N Sarma
Counsel for the .Respondent Nos.2 to 4, ? to 10, 12, 14. 18, 19, 25 26 32
38: Sri Kamini Venkateswarlu
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
1--
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 25 OF 2016
APHC010662742016
0^
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, Aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated: 14.06.2012 in OP.No. 390 of
2005, passed by the Court of Chairman, Tribunal under the land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act 1982- cum- District Judge, at Anantapur.
Between:
1. G.Sakunthalamma, w/o.S.Anjaneyulu, Aged: 51 years. House Wife,
R/o.Somandepalli village, Penukonda Mandal, Anantapur District.
2. S.Lakshmidevamma, w/o. S.Kullayappa, Aged: 59 years. House Wife,
R/o.18/1/525, Venugopal Nagar, Anantapur District.
....Appellants/Petitioners1 & 2 in O.P No.390/2005.
And
1. B.Rameeja, w/o. B.Fakruddin.
2. M.Prameelamma, w/o. M.Sridhar (Died)
3. B.Obulamma, w/o. B.Bala Raju.
4. K.Maltani, w/o. Alla Bakash.
5. T.Shakeela, w/o. T.Rahamthulla.
6. D.Honnul Bee, w/o. D.Sukur.
7. S. Ameena Bee, w/o. S.AIIa Bakash (Died)
8. B.Tulasi, w/o. B.Mallikarjuna.
9. D.Peeramma, w/o. D.Peeranna.
lO.B.Saroja, w/o. B.Narayana Swamy.
11.B.Laxmi Devi, w/o. B.Nagendra.
ID
12.B.Obulamma, w/o. B.Venkata Ramudu.
13.N.Narayanamma, w/o. N.Kullayappa.
H.S.Julekha Bee, w/o. S.Abdul Majid. Died
15.P.Obuiamma, w/o. P.Narayana Reddy.
16.K.Lakshmi Devi, w/o.K.Lakshmanna.
17.S.Ramnjamma, w/o. Erranna.
18.M.Obulamma. w/o. Narasimhulu.
(Respondents 1 to 18 are residing at Bhagyanagar, Anantapur, Anantaour
District.)
19.The Mandal Revenue Officer, Bukkarayasamudram Mandal,
Bukkarayasamudram, Anantapur District.
...Respondents/Respondents 1 to 19 in O.P No.390/2005.
(As Respondents No.2, 7 and 14 were dead and the Legal Representatives
of them were not brought on record. The case against them
(O.P.No.390/2005) was dismissed. Now no appeal is filed against them
and also no relief is sought for against Respondents No.2, 7 and 14 in the
present Appeal. Hence the Respondents 2. 7 & 14 are not necessary
parties in this Appeal.)
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A Chandraiah Naidu
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: OF 2016
APHC010817972016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, Aggrieved by the Order and Decree of Special court under A.P Land
Grabbing (p) Act, at Hyderabad, from the orders of the District Judge- cum-
Special Tribunal, Cuddapah, made in L.G.O.P No.5of 1990 dated 11.12.1998
u
Between:
1. Ammen Shah Fakira Moque, Cuddapah, Guntha Bazar, Represanted
by G.Amanufeh, S/o.Abdul Gaffar, aged about 48 years, President
Mosque Committee, residing at Cuddapah
2. Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Razack Manzil, Opp: to Public
Gardens, Nampaily,Hyderabad.
...Appellants
AND
1. S.Anwar, S/o.Ghouse Mohiddin, aged about 46 years. Process Server,
District Court, Cuddapah Town
2. K.Abdul Jabbar, S/o. Khaja Hussain, aged about 56 years, residing at
Door No.21/150, Railway Station Road, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah
Town.
3. Syed.Moula Basha, S/o. Dsatagiri Saheb, aged about 32 years, Chiken
Centre Owner, residing at Door No.21/150-E, Railway Station Road,
Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah.
4. Solomen, S/o. Devraj, aged about 52 years, Christian, Iron Coats
Merchant, residing at Door No.21/150-E, Railway Station Road,
Cuddapah Town.
5. Abdul Rawoof, S/o.Fakruddin, aged about 44 years. Scrap Iron
Business, residing at Door No.21/150-K, Railway Station Road, Guntha
Bazar, Cuddapah.
6. Sabjan, S/o.Hameed Saheb, aged about 56 years, Bilal Motor Works
Shop, residing at D.No.4/347/A.10, Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar,
Cuddapah Town.
7. S.A.Sattar, S/o.S.A.Rahiman, aged about 53 years, Rahmania
Engineering Works Shop, residing at D.No.4/347-8. Kotireddy Street,
Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
8. S.Ramthumiah, S/o. Shaik. Ahmed, aged about 75 years, Retired
Process Server, residing at Naik Saheb Street, Cuddapah Town.
i2--
9. Shaik Ahmed, Foster son of Ramthumiah, aged about 43 years. Police
Constable, Pulivendula Police Station, Pulivendula Cuddapah Dist.
10.S., . Iqbal
, Hussain, S/o. Ghouse Mhiuddin - aged about 43 years. Cool
drinks shop, residing at Naick Saheb Street, Cuddapah Town.
years. Advocate, Door
No.4/349-8, Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
12.P.Suresh Babu, S/o. Seetharaiah, aged about 33 years. Photo Studio
Business, residing at Door No.4/349-81, Sivalingaiah Street, Cuddapah
13.S.Abdul Khader, S/o. Not Known, aged about 56 years, residing at Door
No.4/347-82, Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
14.Kesavarao, S/o. Vittal Rao, aged about 29 years. Auto Painter, residing
at D.No.4-349-82, Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town,
15.Mallikarjuna Reddy, S/o. Not Known, aged about 42 years. Automobile
Shop, residing at Sivalingaiah Street, Cuddapah Town & Dist.
16. Suresh Babu, S/o. Venugopal, aaed about 34 yea.^s, Suresh
T.V.Shop. Newly constructed Room1, residing at Sivalingaiah Street,
Buntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
IT.PV.Subba Rao, S/o.Not Known, aged about 46 years, Khadi Bandar
Shop, Newly constructed Shop Room, residing at Sivalingaiah Street
Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town
18. Shaik. Khader Basha, S/o. Ghouse Mohiuddi, aged about 33 years
Jalal Engineering Work Shop, Newly constructed Room, residing at
Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
19.Shaik.Anwar, S/o. Abdul Khader aged about 36 years. Tea Hotel
Owner, residing at D.No.4/347-A.10. Sivalingaiah Street Guntha Bazar,
Cuddapah Town. (Died per LR.R20.)
20.Smt.Shaik.Khairunnisa.
^ ^ ^ ^ VV/o.Late.Shaik./Anwar, aged about 38 years,
R/0.D.N0.4-347/AIO. Sivalingaiah Street, Guntha Bazar Kadapa Town
& Dist.
....Respondents
~--13
\
(Respondent No.20 was impleaded as Legal representative of R.19. as
per orders in I.A.NO.475/2009 dated 20.7.2010)
...Respondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2017(LGAMP 27 OF 2017)
Petition under Order 13 Rule 9 r/w 151 of C.P.C., praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit Wed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to return the exhibits B-2 to B-5 by replacing them with
certified copies.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin, (SC for A.P.
State Waqf Board)
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 27 OF 2016
APHC010171242016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the orders of the Special Tribunal Guntur in L.G.O.P.No. 1 of
2010 dated 15.07.2013.
Between:
Nagari Ramanamma, W/o. China Kasaiah, Aged 48 years, Hindu,
Housewife, R/o. Zakir Hussain Hagar, D.No. 459/B of Old Guntur, Ward
No. 15/A, Old Guntur, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...AppeHants
AND
1. Shaik Pyari Jan, W/o. Jani Saheb, Aged 61 years, Resident of Zakir
Hussain Nagar, D.No. 459/B of Old Guntur, Ward No. 15/A, Old Guntur,
Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
2. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by District Collector Coilectorate,
Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Venkata Subbaiah Pogula
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
j^ND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 29 OF 2Q1fi
APHC010687522016
Wd
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court Under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibion) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P. No. 16/2009, dated 25.07.2013.
Between:
Gudikandula Prasad, Son of Ramulu, aged 52 years. Resident of Door
No. 15-11-124, 1=' Lane Raghavnagar, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Appellant/Applicant
AND
1. Mahankali Aruna, Wife of Sreenu
2. Bobbin Sambrajyam, wife of Sreenivasarao
(Respondents 1 to 2
are residents of Venkateswara Colony (now
unofficially named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony , Old
Guntur, Guntur JCJC)
75-
V
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Director Collector, having
office at Collector, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 31 OF 2016
APHC010184162016
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Order and Decree dated 15-06-2007 passed in L.G.O.P No.
34/2003 on the file of the Special Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram.
Between:
Manchukonda Venkata Jagannadham, S/o Late Satyanarayana, Hindu,
aged about 61 years, Occ: Business. Plot No.26, Pandurangapuram,
Visakhapatnam.
...Appellant/Applicant
AND
1. D Demudu, father's name and age not known, major Hindu, residing at
Jogayyapalem, VuttarapalH P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal.
2. Singampalli Gangu Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at VuttarapalH village and panchayat, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
3. Seemunna Demudu, fathers name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Simhadripalem, Nidigattu P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal.
-n
4. Bodala Karunaidu, father'
s name and age not known, residing
Kothavuru, KankatapalH P.O.. Kothavalasa, Vizianagaram District.
5. Kaliempudi Atchalu, father'
s name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Sambayyapalem village, KaKatapalli P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal.
6. Kaliempudi Simhachalam, father's name and age not known, Hindu
residing at Sambayyapalem village, KaKatapalli P.O. Kothavalasa
Mandal.
7. Bodala Ramulu, father's
name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Kothavuru village, P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
8. Bodala Somulu, father's
name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Kothavuru village, P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
9. Vanam Suri Demudu, fathers name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Chinnipalem Village, Vuttapalli P.O Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
10. Katana Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Jogayyapalem Village, Vuttapalli P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District
ll.Siravarapu Sannibabu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Jogayyapalem Village, VuttapalliP.O.,Kotha valasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
12.Lagudu Demudu, S/o Tata, aged not known, Hindu, Jogayyapalem
Village, Vuttapalli P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
13.Jarajapu Narasinga Rao, father's name and age not Known, residing at
Chinnipalem, Vuttapalli P.O, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
--
r
14.Kallempudi Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Sambayyapaiem Village Nidigattu (P.O, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
15.Boddi Apparao, father's name and age not known, Hindu residing at
Sambayyapaiem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District..
16.Lagudu Pydithalli Rao, father's name and age not Known, residing at
Jogayyapalem, Vuttapalli P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
17.Kallempudi Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Sambayyapaiem village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
18.China Sanyasi, father's name and age not Known Hindu, residing at
Sambayyapaiem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
19.Kotana Simhadri, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Jogayyapalem, Vuttapalli P.O., KothavalasaMandal, Vizianagaram
District.
20.Midatana Bogesu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Jogayyapalem, VuttapalliP.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
21.Simma Prakasam Datanna, father's aame and age not known, residing
at Simhadripalem, Chinnipalem, Vuttapalli P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
22.Simma Kanna Rao, father's name and age net known, Hindu, residing
at Simhadripalem. Vuttapalli P.O.KothavalasaMandal, Vizianagaram
District.
u-
23.Badithaboni Sannibabu, father's name and age not known. Hindu
residing at Simhadripalem. Vuttapalli P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
24.Simma Prakasam, father'
s name and age not Known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem, VuttapalliP.O. KothavaiasaMandal.Vizianaga ram
District
25. Simma Dalappa, fathers name and age not Known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem. Vuttapalli, P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianag a ram
District.
26. Simma Mallamma, husband's name and age not known. Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem, Vuttapalli P.O. KothavalasaMandal,
Vizianagaram District..
27. Simma Tata, father's
name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem. Vuttapalli P.O. k'r> f'n
•
oo
>.1 lk.4
I o o O'
<..1IC40C<
V ii:.icii laycll at i I
District.
28. Simma Sanyasi. father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem, Vuttapalli P.O. KothavalasaMandal,
Vizianagaram District.
29.Badithaboni Gangamma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem, Vuttapalli P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
30. Simma Yerrayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem, Vuttapalli P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
31.Bodala Swamy Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Koihavuru village & pest, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
n
32.Dogga Nooki Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Jogayyapalem Village, Vuttapalli P.O., KothavalasaMandal,
VizianagaramDistrict.
33.Surireddl Ramunaidu, father's name and age not known, residing at
Nidigattu Village & Post Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
34.Challi Sanyasi Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Sambayyapalem Village, Nidigattu (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
35.Challi Chinna, father's name and age not known, Kantakapalli P.O.
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
36.Simma Ramulu, fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripalem village Nidigattu (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
37. B Apparao, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Sambayyapalem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
38. Gudivada Tata, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Sambayyapalem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
39.Kallempudi Sanyasi, father's name and age not known.
Sambayyapalem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
40. K Demudamma, husbands name and age not known, Sambayyapalem,
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
41. K Konda, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Sambayyapalem,
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
42.Challa Sanyasi, father's name and age not known Hindu,
Sambayyapalem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
--
43.Simma Yeruku Naidu, fathers name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Simhadripuram village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
44.Simma Ramudu, father's
name and age not Known, Hindu,
Simhadripuram village Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa ivlandal.
Vizianagaram District.
45.Simma Varusu fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripuram village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
46.Simma Apparao, father's name and age not known Hindu,
Simhadripuram village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
47.Simma Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripuram village, Nidigattu P.O. t \wki IC4 V ciiaoci
Tv I _ I
iviai luai,
Vizianagaram District.
48.Simma Veresanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu
Simhadripuram village Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
49.Simma Yerrayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem, Nidigattu P.O., KothavalasaMandal Vizianagaram
District.
SO.Simma Appala Swamy, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripuram village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
SI.Buthala Kannamma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
t Kothavuru village (Post) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
i cfdCDlQiny al
District.
\
52.Butha!a Da^appa, father's name and age not knowni Kothavuru village
(Post) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizranagaram District.
SS.Bothala Kanna Rao, Father's Name and age r>ot known, Hindp
Kothavuru village (post) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
54.Buthala Prakasam, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village (Post) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
55.Baditaboni Gangamma, husband's name and age not Known, Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
56.Simma Sanyasi, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Simhadripalem (v), Nidigattu Post, KothavalasaMandal,
Vizianagaram District.
57.Simma Dalappa, father's name and age not known to the applicant,
Hindu, residing at Simhadripuram KothavalasaMandal,
Vizianagaram District.
58.Simma Gangavya, father's name and age not Known, Hindu
Simhadripuram, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
5&.Simma Kannamma, husband's name and age not known,
Simhadripuram, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District
eO.Simma Thata, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripuram, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
61.Simma Pydan>ma, husband's name and age not known,. Hindu,
Simhadripuram, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
62.Simma Suri Demudu, father's name and age not known, residing at
Simhadripuram Village, Nidigattu Post, Kothavalasa (IVl), Vizianagaram
District.
63.Simma Sankaramma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu (P.O.) Kothavalasa
Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
64.Simma Mallamma. husba.nd's name and age not known. Hindu,
Simhadripalem village. Nidigattu (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
65.Simma Demudu, father's
name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu (P.O.) Kothavalasa Mandal.
Vizianagaram District.
66.Simma Tatalu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Simhadripalem
village. Nidigattu (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
67.Simma Sankara Rao, father's name and age not known, Hindu
Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal
V iz-iai iagaram District.
eS.Baditaboni Dalappa, father's name and age not known. Hindu.
Simhadripalem village Nidigattu (P.O.) Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
69.Baditaboni Gangayya, Fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Simhadri Palem village, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram, District.
70.Buthala Pentayva. father's name and age not known. Hindu, residing at
Kothavuru village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
71.Buthala Appanna, father's name and age not known. Hindu. Kothavuru
village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram Dist.nct.
72.Buthala Batta, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
0^3 --
(
73.Simma Butchamma, father's name and age not. known, Hindu, residing
at Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
74.Kallempudi Simhachalam, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at SambayyapaJem, Nidigattu P.O., Kothavaiasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
75.Kallempudi Sanyasi, Father's Name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu P.O., Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
76.Buthala Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Kothavuru village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
77.Buthala Peramma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
78.Buthala Ramulu, father's name and age not Known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
7&.Bodala Narayana, father's name and age not Known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
SO.Bodala Akku Naidu, father's name and age not known; Hindu
Kothavuru village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
81.Bodala Ramulu, father's name and age not Known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
82.Bodala Gangulu, father's name and age not Known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
83.Bodala Ramulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
84.Bodala Demudu, father' s name and age not Known, Hindu. Kothavuru
village & (P.O.), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
85.Bandi Dermudu, father's
name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Chinnipalem village & (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
86.Shaik Suri Saheb, father's
name and age not known, Muslim, residing
at Vuttapalli village & (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram District.
87.Shaik Noonammi, husband
s name and age not known, Muslim,
Vuttapalli village & (P.O). Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
88.Dogga Appala Naidu. father's
name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Jogayyapalem, Vuttapalli (P.O), KothavalasaMandal,
Vizianagaram District.
89. Degala Ramulu, father'
s name and age not known, Hindu, residing at
Kothavuiu (V) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
90.Patarapalli Demudu, father' s name and age not Known, Hindu,
Kothavuru (V) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
91.Midatana Satyam. father's
name and age not known, Kothavuru (V) &
Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
92.Patarapalli Simhachalam, father's name and age not known. Hindu,
Kothavuru (V) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District
93.Nerella Pydithalli. husband s name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru (V) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram District.
94..Patarapall! Suryanarayana, fathe rs name and age not known, Hindu
Kothavuru (V) & Post. Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram District.
95.Patarapalli Apparao. father's
name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru (V) & Post, Koth svSiSss iVisn 'vJC3J, Vi^iaiidydrc^n^ Distrid.
r,
96.Gudiyada Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
97.Gudivada Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
98.Gudivada Simma, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
99.Gudivada Aarasamilli, fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
100. Simma Demudu, father's name and age not known,
Sambayyapalem, Nidigattu (P.O) Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
101.
Midatana Atchalu, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru village and (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
102.
Pilla Tata, father's name and age not known, Hindu, Kothavuru
village and (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
103.
Simma Sanyasi, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
104.
Patarapalli Suri, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru (V) & (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
105.
Nemala Satyam, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru (v) & (P.O)., Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram
District.
106.
Seemusuri Samudram, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Chinnipaiem, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
107.
Aangi Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Appannapalem, Vuttapalli (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram
District.
108.
Banda Ramudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Chinnipaiem (v) & (Post) Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
109.
Banda Somulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Chinnipaiem (v) & (Post), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
H r\
110.
Patarapalli Pydithalli, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru (v) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
111.
Simma Suri Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Simhadripalem Nidigattu (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal.
Vizianagaram District.
112.
Banda Ramulu, father's name and age not Known, Hindu
residing at Chinnipaiem (V) and post Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
113.
Seemasuru Peda Tammunaidu, father's name and age not
known, Hindu, Chinnipaiem (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
V .
114. Seemasuru Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Chinnipatem (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
115. Jami Simhachalam, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Sambayyapalem (v), Nidigattu Post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
116. Gullipalli Pydithalii, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem (v), Nidigattu Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
117. Neeila Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru (v) & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
118. Jagarapu Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
119. Jami Aarasavilli, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Sambayyapalem (V), Nidigattu Post, Kothavalasa (M),
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
120. Chokkakula Narayana, Father's Name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem(V), Nidigattu of Kothavala Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
121. Simma Apparao, Father's name and age not known, Hindu
residing at Simhadripalem village, Nidigattu (P.O.) Kothavalasa (M)
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
122. Gudivada Thata, father's name and age not known, Hindu
residing at Sambayyapalem (V), Nidigattu (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal
Vizianagaram District.
123.
Gudivada Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Sambayyapalem (V), Nidigattu (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
124.
Thamatapu Kannayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu
residing at Kothavuru Village & (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal
Vizianagaram District.
125.
Yalta Appanna, father's name and age not known, Hindu, residing
at Kothavuru (v) (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
126.
Jami Eswaramma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Kothavuru (v) (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
127.
Gullipaili Pydithalli, fathers name and age: not known, Hindu
Kothavuru (v) (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
128.
Nekkili Sri Ramulu, father's name and age not known,. Hindu,
Kothavuru (v) (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District,
129. Gulli Pydithalli, fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru (v) (P.O), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
130.
Gudivada Bangaramma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Sambayyapalem village, Nidigattu (PO), Kothavalasa
Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
131.
Chokkakula Pydithalli, fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Sambayyapalem village, Nidigattu (PO), Kothavalasa
Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
132.
Gudivada Thata, father's name and age not knovm, Hindu,
residing at Sambayyapalem village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianaaaram
District.
133. Thadireddi Appala Nafdu, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Kothavuru village (Post), Kothavalasa (M),
Vizianagaram District.
134. Gudivada China Demudu, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Kothavuru village (Post), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
135. Bodala Ramakrishna, father's name and age not known. Hindu,
Kothavuru Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
136. Yella Appalanarsu, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
137. Yella Gangamma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
138. Singampalli Mutyalu Naidu, husband's name and age not known,
residing at Vuttapalli Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
139. Seeyunuru Thammayya, father's name and age not known,
Chinnipalem Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
140. Bojangi Sanyasi Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
141. Bojangi Jagannadham, father's name and age not known, Hindu
Vu ttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
142. Singampalli Mutyalu Naidu, father's name and age not known,
residing al Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
143. Singampalli Sannibabu, fathers name and age not known Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
--30
144.
Singampalli Ramu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
145.
Singampalli Demudu, father's name and age not Known. Hindu
residing at Vuttarapalli (v) & post, Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram
District.
146.
Singampalli Akkamma, husband's name and age not luiown,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianagaram
District.
147.
Singampalli Thata, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District,
148. Singampalli Pydithalli, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
149.
Singampalli Appala Swamy, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
150.
Singampalli Jagandha Swamy, father's name and age not known.
Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Nandal, Vizianagaram District.
151.
Singampalli Sanni. father's name and age not known. Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
152.
Singampalli Chinna, father s name and age not Known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
153.
Singampalli Mutyalu Naidu, father's name and age not known.
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagara.m
District.
154.
Singampalli Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
■^1 --
155. Singampalli Thata Babu, father's • name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram
District.
156. Singampalli Bangaramma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram
District.
157. Singampalli Sannibabu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram District.
158. Singampalli Sathibabu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram District.
159. Gavireddi Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram District.
160. Singampalli Raju Naidu, father's name and age not known,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram District.
161. Bodanki Sanyasi Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram
District.
162. Singampalli Mutyalu Naidu, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandai, Vizianagaram
District.
163. Acherlla Mahalakshmi, father's name and age not Known, Hindu,
residing at Jogayvapalem, Vuttarapalli (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
164. Ganireddi Demudu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Chinnipalem village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandai,
Vizianagaram District.
S2
165.
Singampalti Jagannadham, father's name and age not- known.
Hindu, residing at Vuttarapalli village &. post. Kothavalasa Mandal.
Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
166.
Singampalli Satyam. father s name and age not known, Hindu.
Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianagaram District.
167.
Lavudu Venkata Rao. father' s name and age not known, Hindu
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram District
168.
Dandu Appala Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu.
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
169.
Koyyana Arjunamma, husband s name and age not know, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
170.
Singampalli Appalanaidu, father's name and age not Known,
Hindu. Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram
District.
171.
Singampalli Tatayyanaidu. father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianagaram
District.
172.
Singampalli Mutyalu Naidu. father's name and age not known
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal Vizianagaram
District.
173.
Singampalli Bangaramma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
174.
S Pydamma, husband's name and age net known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
175.
Singampalli Yerribabu, fathers name and age net known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizia nagaram District.
176. Singampalli Chinnodu, father's name and age rrot known, Hindu,
residing at Vuttarapalii village & post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
177. Singampalli Awala Swamy, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Vizianagaram District.
178. Lavudu Sreeramulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
179. Lavudu Akkulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
189. Singampalli Nayanamma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
181. Lagudu Krishnamma, husband s name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
182. Lagudu Nayanamma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
183. Lagudu Appala Swamy, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
184. Lagudu Yerrinaidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
185. Lagudu Sanni, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
186. Lagudu Appala Swamy, fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
.187.
Singampalli Ramu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
188. Lagudu Atchibabu, father's name and age not known, Hindu
Vuitarapalii (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
189.
J Lagudu Rama Rao, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
190.
Dandu Appa Rao, fathers name and age not Known. Hindu.
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
191.
Lagudu Sanyasamma, husband s name and age not knows
Hindu. Vuttarapalli (V) and post, .kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
192.
Lagudu Nannanammi, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Vuttarapalli village and post. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
193.
Koyyana Arjunammi, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu. Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
194.
Gorlla Subbayya, fathers name and age net known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
195.
Dandu Bangaramma, husband's name not known, Hindu.
Vuttarapalli (V) and post. Kothavalasa Mandal. Vizianagaram District.
196.
Dandu Appalanaidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
197.
Koyyana Suridemudu. father's name and age not known. Hindu,
vutiaiapaiii and post, Kotnavaiasa Mandai, Vizianagaram District.
--
198. Jayanti Venkata Ramana, father's name, and age not known,
residing at Chinnipalem village and post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
199. Singampalli Ramu Naidu, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing, at Vuttarapalli (y) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
200. Gorlli Mallayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
201. Gorlli Subbayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
202. Singampalli Narsimnaidu, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
203. Singampalli Laksh, husband's name and age not known, Hindu
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
204. Singampalli china Appala Naidu, husband's name and age not
known, Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
205. Singampalli Peda Appala Naidu, father's name and age not
known, Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
206. Singampalli Jogulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
VuttarapaIN (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
207. Singampalli Mahalakshmi, husband's names and age not known,
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
208.
Singampalli Venkateswarlu, father's name and age not known
Hindu, Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
209.
Singampalli Dalayya, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
210.
Singampalli Pydi Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
211.
Singampalli Peda Tata, father's name and age not known Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
212.
Karri Rama Rao, father's name and age not known, Vuttarapalli
(V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
213.
Pediredia Lakshmi, husband's name and see not known, Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
214.
Pediredia Lakshmayya, father's name and age not Known Hindu,
Vuttarapalli (V) and post, Kothavalasa ai, Vizianagaram District.
215.
Dannina Simhadri, father's name and age not known, Vuttarapalli
{V) and post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
216.
Thinka Appala Raju, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dathe Village &. Post, Appannapalem Panchayat, Kothavalasa Mandal,
Kothavalasa Miandai, Vizianagaram District.
217.
Dannina Simhachalam, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Daruipeta, Dathe post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Kothavalasa
Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
218. Dannina Konda, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
uannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
(
219. Venka Jagannadham, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta ViHage Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
220. Dannina Appala Raju, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
221. Dannina Apparao, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
222. Lenka Narayana, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
223. Pediredia Raju, father's name and age not Known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
224. Pediredia Satyavathi, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
225. Pediredia Appa Rao, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
226. Pediredia Narayana, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
227. Dasari Pydamma, father's name and ace not known, Hindu,
Kothavuru Village & Post, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
3S
228.
Lenka • Kannayva, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Dannipeta Village Dathe P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
229.
Lenka Aappanna .Patrud , father's
name and age not known,
Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
230.
Banugu Somanna, fathers name and age not Known, Hindu,
residing at Kotha Sunkarapalem Village, Kankatapalli P.O.,
Vizianagaram District.
231.
Malina Kannababu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Dannipeta Village, Dathe post, Kothavalasa Mandal
Vizianagaram District.
232.
Banugu Tata, father's name and
age not Known, Hindu, residing
at Kutiid
ounkarapaiern Viiiage Karikaiapaiii (FO), Vizianagaram
District.
233.
Pediredia Narasimham, father s name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Dannipeta Village, Dathe P.O. Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
234.
Banugu Aatchayyamma, husband's name and age not known
Hindu
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
235.
Pediredia Appala Raju, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
236.
Pediredia Simhachalam, father's name and age not known,
Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO) Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
237. Pediredia Appala Konda, father's name and age not known,
Hindu, Dannipeta ViHage Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal,
Vizianagaram District.
238. Pediredia Potharaju, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
239. Dannina Narasimhulu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
240. Lenka Gongalamma, husband's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
241. Dannina Ramulu, father's name and age not known Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
242. Pediredia Kanna Babu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
243. Lenka Annapurnamma, husband s name and age not known
Hindu, Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal
Vizianagaram District.
244. Lenka Venku Babu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
245. Pediredia Samudram, father's name and age not known, Hindu.
Dannipeta Village Dathe (PO), Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram
District.
-^0
246.
Pediredla Kanthamma, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
247.
Pediredla Narasayya, father's name and age net known, Hindu,
residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
248.
Pediredla Sarabavya, father's name and age not known. Hindu,
residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
249.
Korukonda Appa Rao. fathers name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
250.
Pediredla Tatalu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District.
251.
Bodala Swamy Naidu, father's name and age not known, Hindu,
residing at Dathe Village Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram District,
252. no name, -
253.
Behara Suryakantham, husband's name and age not known,
Hindu, residing at Dathe village, Baligattam (P.O), Vizianagaram
District.
254.
Homes of the Indian Pation, represented by its Manager,
Kothavalasa Village, Post and Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
255.
Vasavi Industries limited, represented by its Managing Director,
Asilmetta junction. Visakhapatnam.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T N M RANGA RAO
■wounsei for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 1 OF 2017
APHC010496192017
0^
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the orders of the A.P. Land Granbbing [Prohibition] Tribunal
[District Judge] at Guntur in L.G.O.P. No. 13/2009, dated 25.07.2013.
Between:
Rajiya Sulthana, daughter of Mohammed Amanullah, Resident of Flat
No.105, Bramarambika Apartments, Gowthamnagar, Malkarjgiri,
Hyderabad,Hyderabad City Civil Court Limits.
...Appellant/Applicant
AND
1. Vemula Punyavathi, wife of Srinivasarao
2. Tupakula Parvathi, wife of Panakalu
3. Bandaru Aruna, wife of Raju, (Respondents 1 to 3 are residents of
Venkateswara Colony (now unofficially named by the land grabbers)
Besides RTC Colony, Old Guntur, Guntur JCJC)
4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector, Office at
Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents:None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 2 OF 2017
APHC010511572017
W-§
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court Under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P. No.17/2009, dt.25.07.2013.
Between:
Mohammed Nasirunnisa Begum, wife of Yacob, aged 51 years, Muslim,
Resident of- Door No. 17-9-46, 6th line, Anandapet, Guntur, Guntur
District.
...Petitioner
AND
1. Shaik Saleema, wife of Subhan
2. Seru Arunakumari, Wife of Nagaraju
(Respondents 1 to 2
are residents of Venkateswara Colony (now
unofficially named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony, Old
Guntur, Guntur JCJC)
3. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector having
Office at Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur District.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 3 OF 2017
APHC010573892017
wM
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Common Order dt.21.03.2014 in L.O.P.No.776 of 2004 on the
file of the Land Grabbing Tribunal cum District Judge, Vizianagaram.
Between:
J.M.Bazul Ahhab, S/o.M.B.A.Jamal Mohammad, aged 44 years,
Muslim, Trader, residing at 34 Narayana Syrang Garden, street,
Chennai, rep by his Power of Attorney Holder, Janab Perabu Sayed
Ahmed, S/o.Perabu Habeeb Mohammad, aged 65 years, muslim
Trader, residing at Door No. 1-1-47, Bowdara Road, Cantonment,
Vizianagaram Town and District.,
...Appellant/Petitioner
AND
1. The Vizianagaram Municipality, rep by its Council, Vizianagaram.
2. The Superintendent Engineer, A.P. Transco, VUDA Complex, Opp:
R.T.C. Complex, Vizianagaram.
3. A.P. Housing Board, Chennareddy Bhavan, Vizianagaram.
4. A.P. Housing Corporation, Chennareddy Bhavan, Cantonment,
Vizianagaram.
5. Mandal Revenue Officer, Vizianagaram Revenue Mandal,
Vizianagaram.
6. The State of A.P., rep. by the District Collector, Vizianagaram Dist.
Vizianagaram.
7. Pothala Eswaramma, W/o. Potala Suri aged about 50 years Hindu
House hold duties, residing at Cantonment Vizianagaram.
8. Korada Sankara Rao, S/o Korada Ali aged 55 years, Hindu, trader
residing at Cantonment, Vizianagara m.
9. Nakkadam Suri, S/o. Yerrayya, aged about 75 years, Hindu, Rikshaw
Puller, residing at Cantonment., Vizianagaram.
lO.Gandarapa Bangarraju, S/o. Apparao, aged about 45 years, Hindu Auto
Driver duties, residing at Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
H.Durgasi Kurma Rao, fathers name not known, aged about 45 years,
Hindu Rickshaw Puller, Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
12 Munjeti Chinna, S/o Parasayya, aged 57 years, Hindu. roc:
at. Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
13. Munjeti Rama Krishna, father's name not known, aged about 35 years
trader, residing at Cantonment, Vizianaga ram.
14.Yeddu Atchayyamma. W/o. Suri, aged about 55 years. House hold
duties, residing at Godagla Veedhi, Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
15.Kanta Adi Lakshmi, W/o. Pydi Raju, aged about 53 years, Hindu,
household duties, residing at Jonna Guddi, Vizianagaram.
16. Munjeti Gangamma. W/o. late Ramaswamy, aged about 52 years, Ganji
peta, Cantonment Vizianagaram,
17. Munjeti Seetharam, S/o. late Rama Swamy aged about 32 years,
Ganjipeta, Cantonment, Vizianaga ram.
18. Munjeti Manga. D/o. late Ramaswamy, aged about 30 years. Ganjipeta
Vizianagaram.
c-
19:I\4unjeti Nallamaya, S/o. late Rama Swamy, aged about 28 years
Ganjipeta, Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
20.Mun]eti Lakshmi, D/o. Late Rama Swamy, aged about 26 years,
Ganjipeta, Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
21.IVlunjeti Sanyasamma, W/o. late Tata, aged about 61 years, Ganjipeta
Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
22.Munjeti Ramakrishna, S/o. late Tata, aged about 36 years, Ganjipeta
Cantonment,Vizianagaram.
23.Sabbavarapu Eswaramma, D/o. late Tata, W/o. Chakradhar, aged
about 34 Years, Salipeta, Cantonment. Vizianagaram.
24.Sabbavarapu Sarojini, D/o. Munjeti Simhadri, W/o. Sankar Rao, aged
about 41 years, Ganjipeta Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
...Respondents/Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K V Rajendra Prasad
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri V V Satish
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 5 OF 2017
APHC010185542017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Common Order dt.21.03.2014 in L.O.P.No.775 of 2004 on the
file of the Land Grabbing Tribunal cum District Judge, Vizianagaram.
Between:
J.M.ZAINUL ABDEEN, S/o.M.B.A. Jama^ Mohammad, aged 44 years,
Muslim, Trader, residing at 34 Narayana Syrang Garden, street,
Chennai rep by his Power of Attorney Holder, Janab Perabu Sayed
Ahmied, SR). Perabu Habeeb Mohammad aged 65 years, muslim
Trader, residing at Door No. 1-1-47 Bowdara Road, Cantonment,
Vizianagaram Town and District.,
...Petitioner
AND
1. The Vizianagaram Municipality, rep. by its Council, Vizianagaram
2. The Superintendent Engineer, A.P. Transco, VUDA Complex, Opp:
R.T.C. Complex , Vizianagaram.
3. A P Housing Board, Chennareddy Bhavan, Vizianagaram.
4. A P Housing Corporation, Chennareddy Bhavan Cantonment,
Vizianagaram,
5. Mandal Revenue Officer, Vizianagaram Revenue Mandal,
Vizianagaram.
6. The State of A P, rep. by the District Collector, Vizianagaram Dist.,
Vizianagaram.
7. Pothala Chandra Rao, S/o. Narayana, aged about 50 years, Hindu,
R.T.C Driver, residing at Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
8. Pothala Bhavani, w/o. Chandra rao, aged 40 years, Hindu, trader,
residing at Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
9. Pothala Sanyasi, S/o. Late Mutyalu, aged about 85 years, Hindu, residin
at Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
r
IQ.Matta Anjamma, W/o. Bangarayya, aged about 60 years, Hindu, R/o.
Cantonment, Vizianagaram
H.Padmavathi, w/o. Demudu, aged 46 years, Hindu, House hold duties,
R/o. Cantonment, Vizianagaram.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K V Rajendra Prasad
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri V V Satish
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 7 OF 2017
APHC0t0565812017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the special court under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P.No. 18 of 2009 dt. 25/07/2013.
Between:
Mohammed Amanuddin, son of Madina, resident of Isukapalli, Repalle
Guntur District, Repalle JCJC.
...Petitioner
AND
1. Perupogu Mariyakumari, W/o. Bujji
2. Tonu Manikyamma, W/o. MAriyadasu
3. Ponnekallu Malleswari, W/o. Malleswara Rao
4. Kolluri Bala Vasundharadevi, W/o. Subrahmanyam
(Respondents 1 to 4
are R/o. Venkateswara Colony (now unofficially
named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony Old Guntur JCJC)
5. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector, having
Office at Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur JCJC.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 9 OF ?ni7
APHC010185702017
• • s
■ H
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the order and decree dated. 17/08/201 1 passed in L.G.O.P No. 5
of 2003 on the file of the Chairman. Tribunal constituted under the A.P. Land
Grabnbing (Prohibition) Act 1982 at Nellore (Principal District Judge. Nellore)
Between:
1. Nellore Masthanamma, W/o. Sankaraiah, aged about 56 years, Occ:
Housewife, R/o. 2-11,/ 523 Opp: NIPPO, Savithri Nagar, A.K. Nagar
Post, Nellore 524004.
2. Ravulapalli Venkatarama Naidu. S/o. Ramachandraiah, aged about 68
years, Occ: Business, R/o. 24/1821 2nd Lane, Military Colony AK Nagar
Post, Nellore 524004.
...Appellants/Respondents
AND
r
Kommi .Sankaraiah, S/o. Kommi Ragaiah, aged about 42 years, Occ:
Land Lord, 27/1574 Jyothi Nagar, Vedayapalem A.K.N. Nagar Post,
NeIlore-524004
...Respondent/Applicant
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri T N M Ranga Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Sri P Ganga Rami Reddy
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 11 OF 2017
APHC010416802017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3> of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the special Court Under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P. No.14/2009, dated 25.07.2013.
Between:
Rizwana Sulthana, D/o Mohammed Amanullah, Residents of Flat
No.105, Bramarambika apartments, Gowthamnagar, Malkajgiri,
Hyderabad Hyderabad City Civil Court Limits
...Petitioner
AND
1. Burri Anasuya, W/o Stalin.
2. Upputala Laxmi, W/o Sreenu.
3. Shaik Masthan, W/o Hussain
[Respondents 1 to 3 are residents of Venkateswara Colony [now unofficially
named by the land grabbers] Besides RTC Colony, Old Guntur, Guntur JCJC]
--50
4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector Office at
Collectorate, Guntur Guntur JCJC.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 12 OF 2017
APHC010344692017
-.V
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (P) Act, at
Hyderabad, from the orders of the District Judge, Cuddapah-cum-S pecial
Tribunal made in L.G.O.P No.4 of 1990 dated 11-12-1998.
Between:
1. Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah, represented
by G Amanullah, son of Abdul Gaffar, aged about 48 years. President
Mosque Committee, residing at Cuddapah.
2. Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Razack Manzil Opposite to Public
Gardens, Nampalli, Hyderabad.
...Appellants
AND
1. Penugonda Siva Prasad, S/o P Ramappa, aged about 63 years, Hindu
Mine Owner, residing at Angadi Veedhi, Behind Railway Station
Cuddapah town.
2. Kristam Rajagopal Chetty, S/o Subbarao Chetty. aged about 47 years,
Business .residing at Yerra.mukkapalli Street, Cudda^ct,
TT
t r,\.\
-- 57
r
3. A Sai Prasad. S/o A.Venkata Narasaiah, Hindu, aged about 53 years.
Business residing at Angadi Veedhi, Behind Railway Station, Cuddapah
Town.
4. Munaiah, S/o not known, aged about 43 years, residing at D.No.4/347-
F, Cuddapah Auto works. Tractor Repair Shed, Kotireddi Street,
Cuddapah.
5. Ramu, S/o Not Known, aged about 58 years, residing at D.No.4/347-E,
Vijaya Fabricated Shed Kotireddi Street Cuddapah.
6. S Mahamooda Bee, W/o Syed Sabjan, aged about 45 years, residing at
D.No.4/88, Nagarajupeta Cuddapah.
7. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o Now known, aged about 50 years, residing at
D.N0.4/347-C, Borewell Business Kotireddi Street, Cuddapah.
8. G Ravi Kumar, S/o Ramulu, aged about 34 years, residing at
D.N0.4/347-C, Kotireddy Street, Cuddapah.
9. S A Maqbul, S/o S Abdul Saleem, aged about 36 years. Welding work
shop Rangareddy Motor Shed, Old Bus Stand Cuddapah,
10.S Jaffar Saheb, S/o Abdul Rahim, aged about 45 years. Car Mechanic
residing at D.No.4/348/B, Kotireddi Street Cuddapah town.
11.S Kareem, S/o Khader Hussain, aged about 48 years. Business Cool
Drinks Bunk, Western side of Door No.4/348-B, Kotireddi Street,
Cuddapah town.
...Respondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
condone the delay of 3048 days in filing the L.R. Petition for Respondent
No.3, i.e. A. Sai Prasad in L.G.A.No.12/2017.
^2 --
lA NO: 2 OF
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
set-aside the abatement caused due to the death of Respondent No.3, i.e. A.
Sai Prasad in L.G.A.No.12/2017.
lA NO: 3 OF 2023
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petitio^n, the High Court may be pleased to
permit the Petitioners to
come on record as Respondents No. 12 to 15 as legal
heirs of deceased Respondent No.3 viz. A. Sai Prasad in the Appeai i e
LG.A.No.12/2017.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 13 CF 2017
APHC010274392017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land ■ Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Judgment and Decree dt.22.07.2013- in L.G.O.P. No.356 of
2008 on the file of the District Judge. Krishna at Machilipatnam.
Between:
1. Padala Sanjeeva Rao, Hindu A/a 55 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-32,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
2. Ramisetty Surya Rao, I III lUU
A / ^ ^
/-vcj HO yiS,
r-
coolie, R/o. D.iNio.76-6-34/2
Bhavanipuram. Vijayawada.
-- SB
r-
3. Pasupuleti Sanyasi Rao, Hindu, A/a 56 yrs, coolie,. R/o. D.No.76-6-36/5
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
4. Gundala Srinu, Hindu, A/a 40 yrs, coolie R/o. D.No.76-6-39,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
5. Ramisetty Gopi, Hindu, A/a 39 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-30
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
6. Ramisettly Kondala Rao, Hindu, A/a 40 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-30,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
7. Sankabathula Nageswara Rao, S/o. Satyam, Hindu, A/a 47 yrs, coolie,
R/o. D.N0.76-6-29/A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
8. Mekala Raju, S/o. Suryanarayana, Hindu, A/a 45 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No
6-59/A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
9. Gundu Appala Raju, Hindu, A/a 47 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-59,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
lO.Kilimi Varalaxmi, W/o. late K. Narasimha Rao, Hindu, A/a 46 yrs, coolie,
R/o. D.No.76-6-57, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada. K. Narasimha Rao
(died) his wife as a Legal representative in the appeal.
H.Marampudi Tatalu, Hindu, /Va 47 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-55,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
12.R. Babu Rao, Hindu, A/a 45 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-54/A,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
13.G.Bangaramma, W/o. late G.Guravaiah, Hindu, A/a 46 yrs, coolie, R/o.
D.N0.76-6-53/A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, G.Guravaiah (died) his
wife as a Legal representative in the appeal.
14.Allam Satyavathi, W/o. Govind, Hindu, A/a. 40 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No. 6-
32/A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
15.P. Krishna, Hindu, A/a 33 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-31/2,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
16.Sanakabathu!a Sanyasamma, W/o. Appa Rao, Hindu, A/a 34 yrs, coo
R/o. D. No. 76-6-51/ 1, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
17.PalIa Appala Raju, S/o. Narasaiah, Hindu, A/a 52 yrs, coolie, R/o.
D.No.76-6-37/2, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
18.Shake Abdul Janibi, W/o. late Shake Abdul Rahim, Muslim, A/a 42 yrs.
coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-47/ 1, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada Shake Abdul
Rahim (died) his wife as a Legal representative in the appeal
19.V. Durga Rao, Hindu, A/a 50 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-31/2,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayaw'ada.
...Appellants/Respondents
AND
1. Annabathina China Madhava Rao S/o. Tirapathiah, Hindu, A/a 44
years. Properties, R/o. D.No.76-6-83, Bhagatsingh road, Bhavanipur
Vijayawada.
2. Ghanta Venkata Rao, S/o. Nagabhushanam Hindu, A/a 39 years.
Properties, R/o. D.No.76-9-5A, Municipal School Street, Bhavanipur
Vijayawada.
3. Yerramreddy Nageswara Rao, S/o. China Nagireedy, Hindu, A/a. 36
years. Properties, R/o. D.No.76-8-5/4, Crambway road, Bhavanipur
Vijayawada.
4. Yerramreddy Brahmareddy. S/o. China Nagireddy. Hindu, A/a 20 years.
Properties, R/o. D.No.76-8-18/2, Mainampattivari street, Bhavanipur
Vijayawada.
5. Challa Mohana Rao died, -
--6'^ _
6. Adusuilli Ramanamma, W/o. Venkata Ramanaiah, Hindu, A/a 47 years
Properties, R/o: D.No.76-14-243/1A, Teachers Colony, Bhavanipuram
Vijayawada.
7. Ghanta Aaruna, W/o. Veera Raghavaiah, Hindu, A/a. 42 years.
Properties, R/o. D.No.76-8/1-8, Bhagatsingh road, Bhavanipuram, Vij
ayawada.
8. Pathi Ankamma, W/o. Ranga Rao, Hindu, A/a 41 years. Properties,
R/o. Bhagatsingh road, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada
9. Challa Sugunamma, W/o. Mohana Rao, Hindu, A/a 42 years.
Properties, R/o. D.No.76-9-14/2, ARM road, Bhavanipuram,
Vijayawada.
10.Challa Chandra Babu Naidu, S/o. Mohana Rao, Hindu, A/a 25 years.
Properties, R/o. D. No. 76-9-14/2, ARM road, Bhavanipuram,
Vijayawada.
11.Challa Naga Chandana, D/o. Mohana Rao, Hindu, A/a 22 years.
Properties, R/o. D.No.76-9-14/ 2, ARM road, Bhavanipuram,
Vijayawada.
(Respondents 9 to 11 are added as legal representatives of the
deceased 5th respondent)
...Respondents/Petitioners
12.S Sanjeev, Hindu, A/a 49 yrs, coolie, R/o D.No.76-6-33, Bhavanipuram,
Vijayawada.
13.Gundu Appala Konda, Hindu, A/a 61 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-31,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
14.Padala Narayana Rao, Hindu, A/a 58 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-34
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
5^
IS.Padala Appala Raju, Hindu, A/a 45 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6^34/A.
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
16.A Narayana Rao, Hindu, A7a 52 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-48,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
17.Gundu Venkata Rao. Hindu, A/a 45 yrs, coolie, Rio. D.No.76-6-35.
Bhavanipuram. Vijayawada.
IS.Padala Hamsa, Hindu, /Va 35 yrs, coolie. R/o. D.No.76-6-35/2,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
19.B Srinivasa Rao, Hindu, A/a 45 yrs. coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-31,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
20. K Venkata Rao, Hindu, /Va 42 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-40
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
21.Sundara Govindamma, W/o. N arav ' C4» »
a Rao. Hindu, A'a 45 JflO, CiJiJiiG
rc
R/o. D.N0.76-6-43/2A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
22.Rachamala Venkateswara Babu, Hindu, /Va 38 yrs, coolie, R/o.
D.No.76-6-49/A, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada
23.Korakula Appala Raju, Hindu. /Va 42 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-48.
Bhavanipuram
24.Asha Begam, Muslim, /Va 40 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-47,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
25.Sayyed Rizvan, Hindu, /Va 45 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-45,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
26.Gundu Narasimham, Hindu. A/a 38 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-53/2
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
27. R Ramu, Hindu, /Va 41 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-36, Bhavanipuram,
Vijayawada.
r
28.PaFimi Sayamma, Hindu, Ata. 49 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-54/A,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
29.Md Lateef Musiim, A/a 41 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-51,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
SO.Enturi Appala Raju, Hindu, A/a 48 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-48/A,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
31.R Annonamma, Hindu, A/a 34 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-49,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
32.A Narasimha Rao, Hindu, A/a 42 yrs, coolie, R/o. D.No.76-6-43/1,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada.
(Respondents No 12 to 32 are not necessary parties in this appeal)
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Kamini Venkateswarlu
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4, 6, 8 to 11: Sri V V L N Sarma
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 17 OF 2017
APHC010013322017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Order and Decree dt.25.04.2016 passed in L.G.O.P. No.342
of 1997 by the ffle of the Chairman Special Tribunal under the A.P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, Krishna Machilipatnam.
Between:
^5^
1. Ankem Krishna. S/o Subbaiah age about 69 years, R/o. Dr.No.48-11-1-
5, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
2. Badiraju Chetty, S/o. Veeraiah age about 59 years, R/o. Dr.No.48-11-5-
12, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
3. Nimmala Seetha Mahalakshmi. W/o Rama Krishna Rao. Aged about 52
Yrs, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
4. Talluri Dhanalakshmi, W/o Hemasundara Rao. Aged about 53 Yrs. R/o.
Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
5. Pothina Lakshmi Ammaji, W/o Nancharaiah, Aged about 47 Yrs, R/o.
Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
6. Konduru Venkata Sujatha, W/o Venkateswara Rao, age about 46 years,
R/o. Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
7. Anke.m Annapurnamma W'/o. Late An.kem Krish.na Aged 60 years, Occ
Houswife R/o. D. No. 48-11-1-55. Sai Street. Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada
8. Ankem Veeramani W/o. Ankem Surya Prakash. Aged 42 years. R/o. D.
No. 48-11-1-55, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada
9. Ankem Manikumar S/o. Ankem Surya Prakash, Aged 23 years. R/o. D.
No. 48-11-1-55, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada
10.Ankem Sai Triveni D/o. Ankem Surya Prakash, Aged 21 years, R/o. D.
No. 48-11-1-55, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada
11.Ankem Chandra Sekhar S/o. Late Ankem Krishna Aged 40 years, R/o.
D. No. 48-11-1-55. Sai Street. Currency Nagar, Vijayawada
12. Reddy Rowthu Rajyalakshmi W/o. Yedukondalu, Aged 42 years, R/o.
Joy Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
-- <5^
r •
(Appellant Nos.7 to 12 are brought on record as Lr's of deceased
Appellant No.1 as per Court Order dated 03.02.2020 made in )
...Appellants/Respondents Nos.1, 4, 6, 7,12 & 21.
AND
1. Sri Rudraju Jagapathi Raju, by GPA L.Venkata Rama Raju, Dr.No.55-
14-11,0pp. PWD Quarters, Sethammadhara, Visakapatnam.
2. Nimmala Sambasiva Rao, S/o not known, Dr.No.48-11-5-9, Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
3. Marudu Sambasiva Rao, S/o not known, Dr.No.48-11-5-10, Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
4. Pothina Nancharaiah, S/o not known, Dr.No.48- 11-5-11, Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
5. Palavala Rama Krishna Reddy, S/o Pulla Reddy, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
6. Yadagadi Prakasa Reddy, S/o Venkata Reddy, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
7. Janaki, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
8. Kalyani, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
9. Bandaru Parvathi, W/o Bangaraiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
10. Rama Devi, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
II.Kamya Nayakar Pandiyan, S/o Kamya Nayakar, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
12.Srinu, S/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
13.Busiraju Chitti, S/o Veeraiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
4d --
14.Busiraju Srinivas, S/o Chitti, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
IS.Talupula Srimannarayana, S/o Rajaiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar
Vijayawada.
16.Redrowthu Yedukondal
u, S/o Pitchaiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
17.Katuri Mahendra Kumar, S/o Koteswara RAo, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
IS.Valisetti Prasad, S/o Bhaskar, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
19.Kollipara Samuel, S/o Subba Rao Sai Street, Currency Nagar.
Vijayawada.
20.Rajani, W/o not known, Sai Street. Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
21.Busiraju Naga Muraii, S/o Chitti, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
22.Bikki Naga Raju, S/o Nagapachari, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
(Respondents Nos.2 to 22
are proforma and not necessary parties to
the proceedings)
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.2, 3, 5, 8 to 11 13 to 20, 22 to 27.
jA NO: 1 OF 2017rLGAMP 1 OF 2017)
Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act, praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 32 days in filing the LGA.
against the order and decree dated 25-04-2016 passed in L.G.O.P.No. 342 of
1997, by the file of the Chairman, Special Tribunal under the A.P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, Krishna, Machilipatna m.
r
lA NO: 2 OF 2017(LGAMP 6 OF 2017)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
stay all further proceedings including execution of the order and decree dated
25.04.2016 passed in L.G.O.P. No.342/1997 by the file of the Chairman
Special Tribunal under the AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act cum District
Judge, Krishna Machilipatnam pending disposal of main appeal
lA NO: 1 OF 2018
Between:
Sri Rudraju Jagapathi Raju, by GPA L.Venkata Rama Raju, Aged about
75 years, Occ: Business, R/o.Dr.No.55-14-11, Opp. PWD Quarters,
Sethammadhara, Visakapatnam.
...Petitioner/1®* Respondent
AND
1. Ankem Krishna, S/o Subbaiah, age about 70 years, R/o. Dr.No.48-11-1-
5, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
2. Badiraju Chetty, S/o. Veeraiah, age about 60 years, R/o. Dr.No.48-11-5-
12, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
3. Nimmala Seetha Mahalakshmi, W/o Rama Krishna Rao, Aged about 53
Yrs, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
4. Talluri Dhanalakshmi, W/o Hemasundara Rao, Aged about 54 Yrs, R/o.
Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
5. Pothina Lakshmi Ammaji, W/o Nancharaiah, Aged about 48 Yrs, R/o.
Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
6. Konduru Venkata Sujatha, W/o Venkateswara Rao, age about 46 years,
R/o. Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
...Respondent Nos.1, 4, 6, 7, 12 & 21/Appellant Nos.1 to 5
7. Nimmala Sambasiva Rao, S/o not known Dr.No.48-11-5-9, Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
8. Marudu Sambasiva Rao, S/o not known, Dr.No.48-11-5-10, Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
9. Pothina Nancharaiah, S/o not known, Dr.No.48- 11-5-11. Sai Street,
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
lO.Palavala Rama Krishna Reddy, S/o Pulla Reddy, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
H.Yadagiri Prakasa Reddy, S/o Venkata Reddy, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
12.Janaki, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
13.Kalyani, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
M.Bandaru Parvathi, W/o Bangaraiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
15. Rama Devi, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
le.Kamya Nayakar Pandiyan, S/o Kamya Nayakar, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
17.Srinu, S/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
IS.Busiraju Chitti, S/o Veeraiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
19.Busiraju Srinivas, S/o Chitti, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
20.Ta!upu!a Sririmannarayana, S/o Rajaiah,
Sai Street. Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
^3
r
21.Redrowthu Yedukondalu, S/o Pitchaiah, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
22.Katuri Mahendra Kumar, S/o Koteswara RAo, Sai Street, Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
23.Valisetti Prasad, S/o Bhaskar, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
24.Kol}ipara Samuel, S/o Subba Rao, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
25.Rajani, W/o not known, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
26. Busiraju Naga Murali S/o Chitti, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
27.Bikki Naga Raju, S/o Nagapachari, Sai Street, Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
(Respondents Nos.7 to 27 are proforma and not necessary parties to
the proceedings)
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.2, 3, 5, 8 to 11,13 to 20, 22 to 27.
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
Vacate the orders passed in L.G.M.P.No. 6 of 2017 in L.G.A.No. 17 of 2017
dated. 05.06.2017.
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Order 22 Rule 9 of C.P.C., praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to set aside the abatement caused for not filing LR
Petition by 6.10.2019 in the above LGA.No. 17/2017.
lA NO: 2 OF 2020
Petition under Order 22 Rule 3 of C.P.C. praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to bring the petitioners / proposed appellants 7 to 12 to
come on record as appellants 7 to 12 in the above appeal LGA No. 17/2017
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Yaliabandi Ramatirtha
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri Rama Mohan Palanki
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 18 OF 2017
APHC010277172017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Order and Decree dt.25.04.2016 passed in L.G.O.P. No.341
of 1997 by the file of the Chairman Special Tribunal under the AP Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, Krishna Machilipatnam.
Between:
Kalepalli Samrajyam, W/o. Hanumantha Rao, age about years, R/o.
Dr.No.48-11-5-7, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
...Appellant/Respondents No.1
AND
1. Smt.Chintala Lakshmi Rajyam, W/o. Chintala Gnaneswara Rao, R/o. D
No. 16-6-6, Poornandampet, Vijayawada
2. Smt Gundumeda Kantha Lakshmi, W/o. Seshagiri Rao, R/o. D No. 48-
I !-1-5/6, Sai Street Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
3. Smt Maruchalli Vara Lakshmi Died,
r
4. Jonna Vijaya Bhaskar, S/o. Not Known, R/o. Sai Street Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
5. Vemuri Lingeswara Rao, S/o. Nancharaiah, R/o. Sai Street Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
6. Chilloa Venkata Krishna Rao, S/o. C V V Ramana, R/o. Sai Street
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
(Respondents Nos.2 to 6 are proforma and not parties to the
proceedings.)
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.2-6
lA NO: 1 OF 2017(LGAMP 2 OF 20171
Petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act, praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 74 days in filing the LGA.,
Against the order and decree dated 24-04-2016 passed in L.G.O.P.No. 341 of
1997, by the file of the Chairman, Special Tribunal under the A.P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, Krishna Machilipatnam.
lA NO: 2 OF 2017(L6AMP 7 OF 2017)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
stay all further proceedings including execution of the order and decree dated
25.04.2016 passed in L.G.O.P. No.341/997 by the file of the Chairman,
Special Tribunal under the AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act -cum- District
Judge, Krishna Machilipatnam pending disposal of main appeal
lA NO: 1 OF 2018
Between:
Smt.Chintala Lakshmi Rajyam, W/o. Chintala Gnaneswara Rao, R/o. D
No. 16-6-6, Poornandampet, Vijayawada
...Petitioner/1®* Respondent
AND
1. Smt.KalepaNi Samrajyam, W/o. Hanumantha Rao, aged about years.
R/o. Dr.No.48-11-5-7, Sai Street, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
2. Smt Gundumeda Kantha Lakshmi, W/o. Seshagiri Rao, R/o. D No. 48-
11-1-5/6, Sai Street Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
3. Smt Maruchalli Vara Lakshmi (Died)
4. Jonna Vijaya Bhaskar, S/o. Not Known, R/o. Sai Street Currency Nagar,
Vijayawada.
5. Vemuri Lingeswara Rao, S/o. Nancharaiah, R/o. Sai Street Currency
Nagar, Vijayawada.
6. Chilloa Venkata Krishna Rao, S/o. C V V Ramana, R/o. Sai Street
Currency Nagar, Vijayawada.
(Respondents Nos.2 to 6 are proforma and not parties to the
proceedings.)
...Respondents/Respondents Nos.2-6
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
vacate the orders passed in L.G.A.M.P.No. 7/2017 in LGA.No. 18/2017, dated
05.06.2017.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Yallabandi Ramatirtha
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri Rama Mohan Palanki
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
r
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 24 OF 2017
APHCOt0001262017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act. aggrieved by the Judgment and decree made in O.S No.1 of 1994 on the
file of the court of the District Judge, Cuddapah, dated 11-12-1998.
Between;
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, at guntha Bazar, Cuddapah, Represented
by its President G.Amanultah, Son of Abdul Gaffar, aged about 48
years. Business, Residing at Cuddapah.
...Appellant/Plaintiff
AND
1. S.A. Sattar, Son of Burandin, aged about70 years, residing at Door No.
4/343-A Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town.
2. S.A. Saleem, Son of S.A. Sattar, aged about 30 years, residing at Door
No. 4/343-A Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah. (died per LR's RR's 3 to 12)
3. Smt Maharunnisa Begum, W/o. Late S.A. Sattar, aged about 60 years
R/o, Cuddapah.
4. S Shaheda Begum, D/o. Late S.A. Sattar, W/o. S.Moulali, aged about
40 years, R/o. Cuddapah.
5. S Parveen Begum. D/o. Late S.A. Sattar, W/o. P Azeez Khan, aged
about 35 years, R/o. Cuddapah.
6. S Narsimoon, D/o. LAte S.A. Sattar, aged about 28 years, R/o
Cuddapah
7. S Shaminoon, D/o. Late SA Sattar, aged about 25 years, • R/o,
Cuddapah
8. S Salma, W/o.S.A. Saleem, aged about 35 years, R/o, Cuddapah
9. S Saira Banu. D/o.Late S.A. Saleem. aged about 19 years, R/o,
Cuddapah.
10.S Razia, D/o.Late S.A. Saleem, aged about 17 years, R/o, Cuddapah
11.S Bindiya Banu, D/o. Late S.A. Saleem aged about 14 years, R/o.
Cuddapah.
12.S Imran, S/o. Late SA Saleem, aged about 12 years, R/o. cuddapah
(Respondent Nos. 3 to 12 are brought on record as LRs of deceased
Respondent No.2 vide Court Order dt.25/03/2004 in C.M.P.No.
1717/1999)
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Mohammed Gayasuddi in
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: ?.5 OF 2017
APHC010149282017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, aggrieved by the Judgment and decree made in O.S No.2 of 1994 on the
file of the court of the District Judge, Cuddapah, dated 11-12-1998.
^ • Between:
1. Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, at Guntha Bazar, Cuddapah Town,
represented by its president G. Amanullah, Son of AbduF Gaffar, aged
about 48 years. Business, residing at Cuddapah.
2. I he Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, represented by its Secretary,
now the Chier Executive Offiver, M.J.Road, Nampalli, Hyderabad.
...Plaintiffs/Appellants
AND
1. S Ramthu Miah (died) by L.R.
2. Shaik Ahmad, Foster son of S.Ramthu Miah, aged about 40 years.
Police Constable, now working at No.1 Police Station, Proddatur,
Cuddapah District.
...Defendants/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Syed Shareef Ahmed
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: None Appeared
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri M N Narasimha Reddy
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 28 OF 2017
APHC010622902017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at
Hyderabad from the orders of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal
(District Judge) at Guntur in L.G.O.P No. 15/2009, dated 25-07-2013.
_7o-
Between:
Sanka Koteswara Rao, Son of Anjaneyufu, aged 43 years, resident of
Sekuru Village, Chebrole Mandal, Guntur District.
...Petitioner
AND
1. Akumarthi Durgalaxmi, wife of Sattibabu,
2. Putta Ramadevi, wife of Veeraswamy,
3. Nandiposha Santhosham, wife of Dasu,
(Respondents 1 to 3
are residents of Venkateswara Colony (now
unofficially named by the land grabbers) Besides RTC Colony, Old
Guntur. Guntur JCJC)
4. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by District Collector, having
office at Collectorate, Guntur, Guntur District.
...Respondents/Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri K Srinivas
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 30 OF 2017
APHC010545472017
BBS
B
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act. Aggrieved by the Judgment and decree passed by the Special Court
under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act curn The Principal District Judge,
Visakhapatnam in L.G.C. 25/1994 dated 30.06.2010.
r
Between:
1. Karri Akkulanaidu, S/o. Ramamurthy, Hindu, age: 60 years.
R/o.D.No.49-46-31, Allipuram, Akkayapaiem, Visakhapatnam.
2. Rugada Linga Raju, S/o. Venkatachari, Hindu, aged: 50 years,
R/o.D.No.49-46-7, Allipuram, Akkayapaiem, Visakhapatnam.
3. Gabu Roopa Devi, W/o. Gabu Suryanarayana, Hindu, aged: 56 years.
Residing at Kumili Village, Viziangaram District.
4. Vudi Lalitha Devi, W/o. Eswara Rao, Hindu, aged: 47 years. Residing at
Gantyada, Gantyada Mandal, Vizianagaram District.
5. Tara Bhavani, W/o. Satyanarayana, Hindu, residing at Parlakmidi, State
of Orissa.
6. J. Kanaka Surayanarayana Reddy, S/o. Pentaiaha, Hindu, aged: 42
years, Zeep Driver, DRM Office, East Coast Railways, Visakhapatnam.
7. J. Ramachandra Reddy, S/o. Pentaiah, Hindu, aged: 38 years, DRM
Office, East Coast Railways, Visakhapatnam.
...Appellants/Respondents
AND
The Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam Urban Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri A S C Bose
Counsel for the Respondent: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 32 OF 2017
APHC010240112017
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, against the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (P) Act, at
Hyderabad, from the orders of the District Judge-Cuddapah-cum-Special
Tribunal, made in L.G.O.P No.7of 1990 dated 11-12-1998.
Between:
1. Ameen Shah Fakira Mosqque, Guntha Bazar. Cuddapah, represented
by G.Amanullah, Son of Abdul Gaffar, Aged about 48 Years , President,
Mosque Committee, Residing at Cuddapah.
2. Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board, Razack Manzil, Opposite to Public
Gardens, Nampalli, Hyderabad.
...Appellants/Petitioners
AND
1. P Showkat Ali Khan, S/o.Hassan Khan, aged about 50 years. Lathe
Engineering Works, R/o.D.No.21/150-C Railway Station Road
Cuddapah Town.
2. Mahammad Hasmathullah, S/o.Alli Meah. aged about 53 years.
Business, R/o.D.No.4/349/6A, Portion, Railway Station Road,
Cuddapah Town.
3. M Ramaiah S/o.Naganna. aged about 45 years, Business
R/0.D.N0.4/349/6A. Portion, Railway Station Road. Cuddapah Town.
4. Nagamma, W/o.Not Known, aged about 60 years, R/o.D.No.4/349/6 A,
Railway Station Road, Cuddapah Town.
r
• 5. Dade Saheb, S/o.Osman Saheb, aged about 60 years, Gas Dealer
R/0.D.N0.4/347-E, Kotireddy Street, Cuddapah Town.
6. S. Anwar, S/o.S.Dade Saheb, aged about 32 years. Welding, Bunk
Owner, R/o.Koti Reddi Street, Cuddapah Town.
7. Syed Hyder Beig, S/o.Bahadur Beig, aged about 58 years. Owner of
Ryder Engineering Workshop, R/o.D.No.4/347-D, Koti Reddi Street,
Cuddapah Town.
8. Vasula Ramamurthy, S/o.Narasimhulu, aged about 50 years, Ravi Cane
Furniture Works, R/0.4/347-A-10, Sivalingaiah Street, Cuddapah Town.
9. Venu Bhaskar Reddy, S/o.Lakshmireddi, aged about 32 years,
Vinayaka Street Manufacturing Works, R/o.D.No.4/347-A-10,
Sivalingaiah Street, Cuddapah Town.
10.S.A. Salam, S/o.Kareem Saheb, aged about 60 years, Bharath
Engineering Workshop, R/o.D.No.4/347-F, Koti Reddi Street, Cuddapah
Town.
11.S Ghouse Mohiddin, S/o.Jamal Saheb, aged about 57 years. Motor
Mechanic Workshop, R/o.D.No.4/347-D, Koti Reddi Street, Cuddapah
Town.
12.S Khader Basha, S/o.Tailor Abdul Rahim, aged about 33 years. Black
Smith R/o.D.No.4/347-D, Koti Reddi Street, Cuddapah Town.
13.Hayat Bi, W/o.K.Khasim Khan, aged about 58 years, R/o.D.No.4/397-
6A, Railway Station Road, Cuddapah Town.
14.Smt. Ghousia, S/o. Late.Syed Ryder Ba!g, aged about 58 years.
15.Mastan Baig, S/o.Late Syed Ryder Baig, aged about 40 years.
16.Babu Kakruddin, S/o. Late.Syed Ryder Baig, aged about 38 years.
17. Jamal Baig, S/o. Late.Syed Ryder Baig, aged about 35 years.
IS.Mohamdeen Baig, S/o. Late.S.yed Hyder Baig aged about 33 years.
19.Shafiullah, D/o. Late Syed Hyder Baig, aged about 42 years.
20.Shakeer Banu, D/o. Late Syed Hyder Baig, aged about 37 years.
21.Sayira Banu, D/o. Late Syed Hyder Baig, aged about 32 years.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioners; Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 1 OF 9094
APHC010237292024
mn
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) o f A.P. Land Grabuii iy (Fi oriibition) Act
1982 R/w Rule 16 of the A.P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Rules 1988, against
the Decree and Judgment in L.G.O.P No. 193 of 2015, Dt.26/02/2024 , on the
file of the Principal District Judge West Godavari District, at Eluru.
Between:
Varanasi Satyanarayana, S/o. Subrahmanya Sastry aged about 72
years, Occ; Retired Bank Employee, R/o. D. No. 22D-1-9, Railway
Track Road, Ramakrishnapurarn, Eluru, West Godavari Dist.
...Appellant/Applicant
AND
1. Goddu Sitamahalakshmi, W/o. Satyanarayana, Aged about 69 years,
Occ; Housewife, R/o. Canai Bund, Pampuiachervu Road, Gollaigudem,
Rose Gardens, Eluru, W.G District.
•--
r'
2. Smt Vase f\/heramma. W/o. Pentaiah @ Peter, Aged about 64 years,
Occ;Housewife, R/o. Canal Bund, Pampulachervu Road, Gollaigudem,
Rose Gardens, Eluru, W.G District.
3. Eluru Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Eluru, West
Godavari District.
4. The Thasildar, Eluru Mandal, Eluru, West Godavari District.
...Respondents/Respondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
may be pleased to suspend the operation of Judgment and Decree
Dt.26/02/2024 in L.G.O.P. No. 193 of 2015, on the file Principal District Judge,
West Godavari District at Eluru pending disposal of the main appeal.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Unnam Sravan Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Sri C Venkaiah
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri Manohar Kalangi
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
LAND GRABBING APPEAL NO: 2 OF 2024
APHC010447872024
Appeal filed under Section 7-A(3) of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act
1982 R/w Rule 16 of the A.P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Rules 1988, against
the Order and decree dated 12-06-2024, passed in L.G.O.P. No. 1 of 2009 on
the file of the Principai District Judge, Praksam at Ongole.
%
Between:
Gadiyaram Siddardha Sankar Das, S/o Late Kalidas, Hindu, aged 48
years.
Retired Indian Navy Employee at present Cashier in AP
Grameena Vikas Bank R/o D.No.19-143, Gowtham Nagar, Malkajgiri,
Hyderabad.
...Petitioner
AND
I. Kolakattala Siva Rami Reddy, S/o Sankara Reddy, age: 63 years, R/o
Kurichedu, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte not necessary party to this
appeal)
2. Ammaturi Venkata Subba Rao, S/o Lakshmi Prasada Rao, age: 60
years, R/o. Kurnool Road, Ongole. (Ex-Parte, not necessary party to
this appeal)
3. Bellam Suresh Kumar, S/o Sreeram Murthy, age: 48 years, R/o Padma
Towers, Near Ongole Rural Police Station, Bye-Pass Road, Ongole.
4. Kukapalli Anantha Lakshmi. W/o Nageswara Rao age: 50 years, R/o
Mynampadu Village, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
5. Jupudi Ramabrahmam, S/o. Satyanarayana R/o. Jilalamudi, Prakasam
District.(Ex-Parte. Not necessary party to this appeal)
6. Pathan Khadar Khan, S/o. Sulekhan, age 60 years. R/o. Islampet
Ongole. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
7. Maram Radhika, W/o. Vusa Reddy, Housewife, age: 45 years, R/o
Kurnool Road, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
8, Jagarla.mudi Aruna, W/o. Srinivasa Rao, Occ: .Housewife a'^^'
years, R/o. Pydipadu Village, Prakasam District, (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
r
9. Annem Pitchaya, S/o. Narasimha Rao, R/o. South Bye-Pass Road
Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
to.Sk Anil, S/o. Sulekhan, age; 65 years, R/o. Sitarampuram, Ongole (Ex-
Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
H.Makina Padma, W/o. Venkata Krishna Rao, Housewife, R/o.Tangutur,
Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
12.Damacharla Rajini Kumari, W/o. Sridhar, age: 53 years, R/o. Tangutur
Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeal)
13.Palla Koteswara Rao, S/o. Musulamma, R/o. Chintalapalem,
Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party
to this appeal)
14.Vemuri China Malakondayya, S/o. Narasayya, age: 55 years, R/o.
Gandhi Road, Ongole. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
15.Sunkara Pitchayya, S/o. Subbarayudu, age: 53 years, R/o. 0pp. Power
Office Road, Ongole. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
16.Swarna Haribabu, S/o. Subba Rao, age: 53 years, R/o. Nandanavanam
Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
17.Taruka Xavier Ajay Babu, S/o. Chinnayya, Christian, R/o. Tangutur,
Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
18.Gure]ala Dhana Lakshmi, W/o. Srinivasa Rao, age: 55 years, R/o.
Byepass Road, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
19.Mohan Setty Nageswara Rao, S/o. Venkanna, R/o. Kurnool Road,
Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
20.Nal!amal!i Koti Ratnam, W/o. Venkata Srinivasa Rao. age 55 years, R/o.
Kanigiri. Prakasam District. (Ex Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeal)
21.Uppalapati '/enkateswar ara ju, s/o. Subbaraju, age 60
years, R/o.
Kurnool Road. Ongole. (Ex Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
22.Tammeneni Raghuram, S/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o. Kurnool Road,
Ongole. (Ex Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
23.Chunchu Madhavi, W/o. Lakshmi Narayana, age 47 years.R/o.
Brundavan Nagar, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not
pressed)
24.Chunchu Haribabu, S/o. Kotamma age 50 years, R/o. Ulichi Viiiage,
Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this appeai as not pressed)
25.Chinnareddy Pushpavathi, W/o. Kotayya, age 45 years, R/o.
Turupukammapalem, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal)
26.Mannem Prasada Rao, S/o. Maheswara Rao age 59 years, R/o.
Medarametia Viiiage, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party
to this appeal)
27.Munna Bharathi Vijaya Lakshmi, W/o. Surya Sekhar Rao age 50 years,
R/o.D.No.80-1-101
Ananda Rao Nagar, Ongole. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
28.Akuthota Venkateswarlu, S/o. Adinarayana. age 45 years, R/o. Kurnool
Road, Ongole. (Ex-Parte. Not necessary party to this appeal)
29.Vakkeme!a Subra.h.manyam, S/o. Rami Reddy R/o. Lawyerpet, Ongole.
J 5
(E.x-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
(f • 30. Bodapati Rajya Lakshmi, W/o. Sesha Rao, age 49 years, R/o.
Mangamur Village, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
31.Kammineni Vidhu Latha, W/o. Subba Rao, age 52 years, R/o.
Mangamur Village, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to
this appeal)
32.Muppa Govindaiah, S/o. Chinna Venkayya, age 60 years R/o.
Juttuvaripalem Village, SN Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
33.Muvva Malyadri, S/o. Malakondaiah, age 57 years, R/o. Niparlapadu
Village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
34.Jayavarapu Nirmala, w/o. Suryaprakasa Rao, age; 53 years, R/o.
Maredpalti, Secunderabad. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeal)
35.Jayavarapu Surya Prakasa Rao, S/o. Janardhan Rao, age 58 years,
R/o. Maredpalli, Secunderabad. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeal)
36.Potheneni Lakshmi, W/o. Nageswara Rao, age 48 years, R/o.
Turpukammapalem, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not
pressed)
37.Nagineni Ramesh Babu, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, age 52 years, R/o.
Bandlamitta, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
38.Nalluri Venkata Rao, S/o. Venkata Suramma, R/o. Nirmal Nagar,
Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
39.Pokkala Pedda Pullayya, S/o. Musalamma, age 49 years, R/o.
Bandlamitta, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
40.Maddina Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkata Subba Rao. age 55 years, R/o.
Duddukuru Village, Inkollu Mandal Prakasam District, (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
41.Mannam Venkata Rao, S/o. Veeraiah Chowdary , age 65 years, R/o.
Ganugapudi Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
42.Jilalamudi Koteswara Rao, S/o. Nagabhushanam, age 54 years, R/o.
Pothavaram Village, Prakasam District.
43. Parvathareddy Narendranadh S/o Lakshmaiah Sopirala, R/o.
Chinnaganjam Village, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal)
44.Karasula Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Rangamma, age 45 years, R/o. Chagallu
Village, Ulavapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, (Not necessary party to
fhic or>r>Qol
as not pressed)
45.Karusala Rama Rao, S/o. Chinna Subbamma, R/o. Sundaraiah Bhavan
Road, Ongole (Not necessary party to this appeal)
46.Singamaneni Prasada Rao, S/o.Chandraiah, age; 60 years, R/o.
Vijetha Veedi, Kothapatnam, Prakasam District, (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
47.Singamaneni Vijaya Nirmala, W/o. Prasada Rao, age; 52 years, R/o.
Vijetha Veedi, Kothapatnam Village, Prakasam District, (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
48.Pammi Jaya Rami Reddy, S/o. Nagi Reddy Prakasa Rao, age; 63
years, R/o. Kurnool Road, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to
this appeal)
r--S>i^
r~
49.Nairuri Harsha Vardhan, S/o. Prakasa Rao, age: 55 years R/o.
Satyanarayanapuram, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeaf)
50.Golu Murali, S/o. Surya Rao, age: 55 years, R/o. Ramnagar,Ongole
51.Kolavakkula Subba Rayudu, S/o. Penchala Nayudu, age: 62 years,
R/o. Satyanarayanapuram, 60 Feet Road, Ongole. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
52.S Kalyan Kumar, S/o. Aram Baka Swamy, age: 52 years, R/o. D.Na.5-
1-'t0/2, Kesavaswamipeta, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to
this appeal)
53.Kommi Sobharani, W/o. Krishnaiah, age: 48 years, R/o. Kurnool Road,
Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
54.Dumpa Jayamma, W/o. Chenchu Sekhara Reddy, age: 48 years, R/o.
Karumanchi, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this appeal as
not pressed)
55.Nunni Venkata Krishna Reddy, S/o. Swami Reddy, age: 59 years, R/o.
Guttikondavaripalem Village, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party
to this appeal as not pressed)
56. Bade Srihari Reddy, S/o. Venkateswara Reddy, age: 58 years, R/o.
Rudravaram Village, Chimakurthy Mandat, Prakasam District.
57.Tirumalaraju Krishnama Raju, S/o. Venkatapati Raju, age: 39 years,
R/o. Yeragudipadu, Chimakurthy, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
58.Achufa Sridevi, W/o. Gyaneswara Rao, age: 54 years, R/o. Bapuji
Complex, Chirala, Prakasam.
59.Chakka Giraja Kumari, W/o. Venugopal, age: 55 years, housewife, R/o.
Ganugapalem, Ongole.
60. Sk Malakondaiah, S/o. Meera Saheb age: 58 years, R/o. Marlapadu
Village, Tangutur Mandal, Prakasam District.
61.Tannery Narasamma, W/o. Adaya, age: 61 years, R/o. Konijedu Village.
Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
62. Lanka Ramchandra Rao, S/o. Papayya, age: 55 years, R/o. D.No. 12-
932, Samatha Nagar, Ongole, Prakasam District.
63.Desi Adiseshamma. W/o. Venkata Swamy age: 52 years, R/o. 70/2, 4th
Lane, Pamidipadu Korisapadu Mandal, Prakasam District.
64.Veldi Sridevi, W/o. Sree Krishna Prasada Rao age: 55 years. R/o.
Timmasamudram Village, Inkollu Prakasam District.
65. Tannery Srinivas, S/o. Subba Rao. age: 59 years. R/o. Konijedu Village.
Tangutur Mandal. Prakasam District.
66.Rayani Anjamma, W/o. Hanumanth Rao V./ I
jroo.o,
o
I \> o.
Samathanagar, Ongole.
67.Sayani Ananda Babu. S/o. Dasaradharama Chandra Rao. age: 60
years, R/o. 3rd Lane, NRKT Colony. Narasaraopet, Guntur District.
(Ex-Parte. Not necessary party to this appeal)
68.Bogavarapu Venkata Puma Subba Rao. S/o. Brahmanatayya, age: 62
years. R/o. D.No.6-379. Andhra Kesari Nagar. Kurnool Road. Ongole.
(Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
69.Maddineni Koteswara Rao, S/o. Veerayya, age 61 years, R/o.
Nujellapalli Village, J.Pangulur Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte,
Not necessary party to this appeal)
/O. NidamanuriSuseeia, W/o. Venkateswarlu, age 51 years, R/o. Police
uuaners, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
^3 --
r
71.Kunchala Ayyanna, S/o. Chmna Subbaiah, age. 65 years; R/o.
Duddukuru Village, inkollu Mandai, Prakasam District, (died)
72.Sopisetty Venkata Ramanamma, W/o. Jayalaiah, R/o.
Janardhanapuram, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
73.Gollamudi Raghunath Reddy, S/o. Koti Reddy, age 63 years, R/o.
K.Bitragunta, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District.
74.Sk Prasalamarry, W/o. Mahaboob Basha, age 50 years, R/o. D.No.20-
7-36/2, Lambadi Donka, Ongole.
75.Manchikaiapati Padmaja Boy, W/o. Srva Prasad age 49 years, R/o.
Srinivasa Colony, Kurnool Road, Ongole
76.Abburi Padma, W/o. Venugopal, Housewife, age 51 years, R/o.
Chandrapadu Village, Chimakurthi Mandal, Prakasam District.
77.Yadavalli Lakshmi Narasiha Rao, S/o. Venkateswarlu, age 62 years,
R/o. Lingamgunta Village. Maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-
Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
78.Payyavu}a Parvathi, W/o. Kuttu Prasad, Housewife, R/o. 5th Lane,
Sujatha Nagar, Ongole.
79.Vankayalapati Koteswara Rao, S/o. Subba Rao, R/o. Mallavaram
Village. Maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
80.Kethaboina Padma, W/o. Chennaiah, age 87 years, R/o. Shram Colony,
Kurnool Road, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not
pressed)
81.Kethaboina Chermaiah. S/o. Chennakesavulu. age; 55 years. R/o.
Shram Colony,Kurnool Road, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
82.Thulluri Chennakesavulu, S/o. Chennaiah, age 55 years, R/o. Shram
Colony,
83.Rachumulla Govinda Reddy, S/o. Siva Rami Reddy age 60 years, R/o.
Near Krishna Theatre, islampet, Ongole (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
84.Perini Renuka Devi, W/o. Vamana Murthy, age 57years, R/o. D.No.49-
1-20/2, Miriyalapalem, Ongole (Not necessary party to this appeal as
not pressed)
85.Perini Rajya Lakshmi. W/o. Venkaiah, age 52 years, R/o.
Satyanarayanapuram, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this appeal as
not pressed)
86.Avvaru Nageswara Rao, S/o. Chennaiah age 70 years, R/o. D.No.37-
1-407(149), Bhyagya Nagar, Ongole (Not necessary party to this appeal
as not pressed)
87. Polavarapu Adilakshmi, W/o. Bullabbai, R/o. Old Raja Rajeswaripeta,
Vijayawada. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
88.Vaka Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. Venkata Subba Reddy, age 61 years, R/o.
Rudravaram Village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District, (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
89.Pittam Sobharani, 89. W/o. Krishna Mohan Reddy, age 69 years, R/o.
D.No.37-1-407(149), Bhagya Nagar, Ongole (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
90.Suraneni Padmavathi, W/o. Harihara Rao, age 55 years, R/o. H.No.4-
383, Venkateswara Nagar, Kurnool Road, Ongole. (Not necessary
party to this appeal as not pressed)
91.Gundareddy Venkateswara Reddy, S/o. Gali Reddy, age 60 years, R/o.
H.No.39-1-409(69), 4th Lane, Bhagyanagar, Ongole (Not necessary
party to this appeal as not pressed)
92.Konagani Ramesh, S/o. Ramalingaiah, age 48 years, R/o. Shram
Colony, Kurnool Road, Ongole. (Not necessary party to this appeal as
not pressed)
93.Mamidala Ankamma Rao, S/o. Subbaiah, age 50 years, R/o. Pallamalli
Village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District.
94.The State, Rep. By its District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District.
95.The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Buildings, Ongole.
96.The Municipal Surveyor, Municipal Buildings, Ongole
97.Gadiyaram Nagaraju, S/o. Kalidas (died on 27-7-2024) Rep. by wife as
Legal Representative,Gadiyaram Radhika W/o Late Nagaraju, Aged 43
years, R/o G2, J Hanuman Residency, RajivNagar Extension, Ongole.
98.Gadiyaram Kailasanadh, (died)
99.Kundala Chinna Subbaiah, S/o. Name not known R/o. Duddukuru
Village, InkoHu Mandal Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary
party to this appeal)
100. Bathula Srinivasa Rao, S/o. China Subbaiah, R/o. D.No. 1-64/A,
SC Colony, Maddipadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
101. Gorantia Venkata Rao, S/o. Anjaneyulu, R/o. Doddavarappadu
Village Maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District.
102. Mannam Chandrasekhar, S/o. Ramaiah, R/o. D.No.7-41 (8),
Pandaripuram 2nd Line, Ongole.
103.
Tannery Brahmaiah, S/o. Adeiah, R/o. Konijedu Village,
Tangutur Mandal, Prakasam District.
104. Guttikonda Lakshmi Kantha Rao, S/o. Krishnaiah, R/o.
Rajapanagal Road 7th Cross, Opp. Pushpa Clinic, Ongole.
105.
Kutala Ramesh, S/o. Guravaiah, R/o. D.No.8-196, 4th Line
Sujatha Nagar, Ongole.
106.
Parankusam Venkata Swamy, S/o. Ramanjineyulu, R/o.
Kotikalapadu Village, Addanki Mandal, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte,
Not necessary party to this appeal)
107.
Syed Mahaboob Jani, W/o. Akbarali, R/o.H.No.8-147(6), Sujatha
Nagar, 5th Line Extension, Ongole.
108.
Yarramothu Nageswara Rao, S/o.Nagaiah, R/o. Pettuluru Village,
Kondepi Mandal Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this appeal)
109.
Yarramothu Ramanaiah, S/o. Nagaiah, R/o. Pettuluru Village,
Kondepi Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal)
110.
Marella Venkata Subramanyam Prasad Rao, S/o. Venkateswarlu,
R/o. Chinavari Madugu Village, Pedda Cherlopalli Mandal, Prakasam
District.
111.
Edara Venkata Kao, S/o. Anjaneyulu, R/o. D.No.6-119, Sai Baba
Nagar Kurnool Road, Ongole.
112.
Kanduri Venkata Reddy, S/o. Venkata Subba Reddy, R/o.
Daddavarapalem Village. Santhanuthalapadu Mandal. Prakasam
District. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
113.
Naiiun VeiiKatci Kao, S/o. Venkata Subbaiah, K/'o. U.N0.8-465,
Nirmal Nagar. Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
114. Balineni Subba Reddy, (died)
115. Addala Venkata Seshamma, W/o. Subba Rao, R/o. Gullapalli
Village, Maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
116. Muthyamsetty Nageswara Rao, S/o. Venkaiah, R/o. D.No.4-1-96,
Yanadi Colony, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
117. Bade Srinivas Reddy, Bade Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. Venkata
Krishna Reddy, R/o. Vandava Nagulavaram Village, Veligonda Mandal,
Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
118. Shaik Rahamtulla, S/o. Moulali Saheb, R/o. D.No.7-65-2(3),
Rajapanagal Road, 4th Cross, Ongole (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
119. Rajula Usha Rani, W/o. Tallupureddy Srinivasulu, R/o. D.No.12-
162(16), Bestapalem, PNR Colony, Podili, Prakasam District. (Ex-Parte,
Not necessary party to this appeal)
120. Chundi Ajay Kumar, S/o. Venkateswara Rao, R/o. Paletipadu
Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
121. Kaja Jayarami Reddy, S/o. Garata Reddy, R/o.
Guthikondavaripalem Village, Koppolu, Ongole Mandal. (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
122. Purini Ramanamma, W/o. Ramachandra Reddy, R/o. Near
Panchayat Office, Pernamitta Village, SN Padu Mandal, Prakasam
District. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
123. Cherukuri Vasantha, W/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o. D.No.4-16-2,
Sambasiva Nagar, Ongole (Not necessary party to this appeal as not
pressed)
--
124..
Maddi Venkateswarlu. S/o. Veera Brahmam. R/o. 9t.h Cross,
Raja Panagal Road, Ongole
125.
Kommalapati Punnaiah. S/o. Kondaiah, R/o. Nandhanavanam
Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District.
126.
Nagineni Hanumantha Rao. S/o. Venkaiah. R/o. D.No.20-8-14,
Bandlamitta, Lambadi Veedhi, Ongole (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
127.
Rayapuneni Uma Katyayani, W/o. Rama Chandraiah, R/o.
D.No.8/283, 10th Line, Sujatha Nagar, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
128.
Pathan Nurjahan, W/o. Rasul Khan, R/o. Islampet 2nd Line,
Ongole.
129.
Yara Subba Rao, S/o. Venkata Subbaiah, R/o. Vemulapadu
Village, Ponnaluru Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
130.
Katheneni Padma, W/o. Subba Reddy, R/o. Pernamitta Village,
SN Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
131.
Koli Sarala Devi, W/o. Pothineni Sudhakar, R/o. Nujallapalli
Village, Inkollu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
132.
Somu Venkata Rangareddy, S/o. Subba Rami Reddy, R/o.
D.No.8-164(1), Rajeev Nagar, Lawyerpet, Ongole (Not necessary
party to this appeal as not pressed)
133.
Kesari Brahma Reddy, S/o. Veera Reddy, R/o. Pachalagudipadu
Village, Korisapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
--
r 134. Narravula RamaUnga Reddy, S/o. Konda Reddy, R/o. Veligandia
ViUage, Konakanamitta Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary
party to this appeal as not pressed)
135. Some Laxmi Narayana Reddy, S/o. Sidha Reddy, R/o. Pydipadu
Village, Jarugumalli Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
136. Medaramitia Konda Rao, S/o. Ramanaiah, R/o. D.No.1-65-1,
Vempadu Village, Mundlamuru Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
137. Marella Anji Reddy, S/o. Koti Reddy, R/o. Pavuluru Village,
Inkoitu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this appeal
as not pressed)
138.
Chaganti Nagireddy, S/o. Shram Reddy, R/o. Pesarlapalem
Village, Chirala Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
139. Maddela Krishna, S/o. Kotaiah R/o. 4th Line, 3-24/38,
Ranguthota, Ongole. .
140. Munaganti Veerabrahmam, S/o. Malakondaiah, R/o. Karnativari
Veedhi, Medarametla, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to this
appeal as not pressed)
141.
Kuricheti Ranganayakamma, W/o. Jalaiah, R/o. D.No.7-12-02,
Harihara Nagar, Mangamooru Donka, Near Marrichettu, Ongole. (Not
necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
142.
Uppalapati Suresh Babu, S/o. Subba Raju R/o. Near
Venkateswara
Temple, Samatha Nagar, Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not
necessary party to this appeal)
«--
Kukatla Padma, W/o. Kondala Rao. R/o. K.Uppalapadu VillagT
143.
Kondepi Mandal, Prakasam District (Not necessary party to this appeal
as not pressed)
144.
Data Srinivasa Reddy, S/o. Koti Reddy, R/o. D. No.5-69
H.Nidamanuru Village, Naguluppalapadu Mandal (Not necessary party
to this appeal as not pressed)
145. Karri Nagendramma, W/o. Venkata Rami Reddy R/o.
Guthikondavaripalem Village, Vuluchi Post, Ongole Mandal. Prakasam
District. (Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
146.
Muvva Susila, W/o. Malakondaiah, R/o. D.No.37-62-105(1/4), 4th
Line, Bhagya Nagar. Ongole (Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this
appeal)
147.
Jamallamudi Mary Vajram, W/o. Budala Solman Raju, R/o.
Viswanathapuram, .Podili, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
148.
Pallapolu Nagi Reddy. S/o. Sivaiah, R/o. D.No.4-32(8), 60 Feet
Road, Satyanarayanapuram, Ongole.
149.
Palagani Venka Reddy, S/o. Vijaya Rami Reddy, R/o. Near
Shivalayam Temple, SN Padu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District.
(Not necessary party to this appeal as not pressed)
150.
Kommalapati Suresh Babu, S/o. Rangaiah, R/o. Doddavarappad u
Village, Maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Not necessary party to
this appeal as not pressed)
151.
Shaik Anwar Begum, W/o. Talwar, R/o. 6th Line, Gopala Nagar,
Ongole.
7/
r\
152. Prudvi Nageswara Rao, S/o. Rudraiah, R/o. PandillapalH ViI^age,
Vetapalem Mandal, Prakasam District, (Ex-Parte, Not necessary
party to this appeal)
153. Sri Vishwa Janani Parishat, C/o. Boppudi Ramabrahmam, S/o.
Satyanarayana, RC No. 124/71, Jiltamudi, Tenali Taluk, Guntur District.
(Not necessary party to this appeal as hot pressed)
154. Nelturi Venkata Sathya Narayana, S/o. Sathya Narayana Murthy,
R/o. D.No.5-296, Alluri Sitaramaraju Veedhi, Kurnooi Road, Ongole
(Ex-Parte, Not necessary party to this appeal)
155. Mundunuri Venkata Suresh Babu, S/o. Tirupathi Rao, R/o.
Andhra Kesari Nagar, Kurnool Road, Ongole.
156. Batineni Ayyawara Reddy, S/o. Late Subba Reddy, R/o.
Bodduvaripalem Village, SN Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Added
as per orders in lA No.1107/2016, Dt.05.02.2018) (Not necessaryparty
to this appeal as not pressed)
157. Baiineni Tirupathamma, D/o. Late Subba Reddy, R/o.
Bodduvaripalem Village, SN Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. (Added
as per orders in lA No. 1107/2016, Dt.05.02.2018) (Not necessary party
to this appeal as not pressed)
158. Gadiyaram Madhu Padmaja, W/o. Late Kaitash Nadhdas, R/o. G-
2 Jai Hanuman Residency, Rajiv Nagar Extension, Ongole, Prakasam
District.
159. Gadiyaram Abhinav, S/o. Late Kailash Nadh Das, R/o. G-2 Jai
Hanuman Residency, Rajiv nagar Extension, Ongole, Prakasam
District.
160.
Gadiyaram Sai Krishna Hanish, S/o. Late Kailash Nadh Das R/o.
G-2 Jai Hanuman Residency. Rajiv Nagar Extension. Ongole
Prakasam District.
161.
Gadiyaram Padmavathi (died)
(Respondents 158 to 161 are added as per Orders in I.A.
No.1042/2019. Dt.04.09.2019)
...Respondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order in L.G.O.P. No. 1 of
2009, on the file of the Hon'ble Special court under the A.P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982, Prakasham District at Ongole dated 18-6-2024.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Order 5 Rule 20 r/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High
Court may be pleased to order for steps by way paper publication as against
Respondent No's. 3, 50, 56, 62, 63, 64, 75, 76, 78 97. 102, 104, 105, 107,
124. 128. 139. 148. 151. 155. 158. 159. 160.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri CH Laxmi Naraya na
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.58 & 59: Smt. A Varalakshmi
Counsel for the Respondent No.66 & 103: Sri CH Nagend ramu
Counsel for the Respondent No.73: Sri P Nagendra Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent No.101: Ms. Ayesha Azma S
Counsel for other Respondents: None Appeared
The Court made the following order:
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
* * » *
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON^BL SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
i
LAND GRABBING APPEAL Nos. 20. 19. 21. 24. 25. 26. 27. 29.
31 of 2016,
1, 2. 3. 5. 7. 9. 11. 12. 13.17. IS. 24. 25, 28, 30, 32 of 2017,
and 1 & 2 of 2024
LGA.No.20 of 2016
-Between:
Shaik Masthan Vaii, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Kummaru Durga Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.19 of 2016
Between:
Meriga Mallikarjunaiah, Neliore Dist
APPELLANT i
AND
Gorla Kousalyamma Nellore Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.21 of 2016
Between:
Shaik Sulthan, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Kanchal Venkayamma Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.24 of 2016
Between:
Aabthina Chia Madhava Rao, Vja, Krishna Dist and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Padala Sanjeeva Rao and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
2 LGA Nos.20 of 2&16 & batch
LGA.No.25 of 201 fi
Between:
G. Sakunthalamma, Anantapur Dist & Another
APPELLANTS
AND
B Rameeja Anantapur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.26 of 201 fi
Between:
Ammen Shah Fakira Moque, Hyd and Others
d APPELUNTS
AND
S Anwar Cuddapa Dist Nineteen and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.27 of 2Q16
Between:
Nagari Ramanamma, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Shaik Pyari Jan Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.29 of 2016
Between:
Gudikandula Prasad, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Mahankali Aruna Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.31 of 2016
Between:
M V Jagannadham, Visakhapatnam
APPELLANT
AND
D Demudu Kothavalasa Mandal and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.l of 2017
Between:
Rajiya Sulthana, Hyderabad
APPELLANT
AND
Vemula Punyavathi Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
3 LGA Nos.20of2ai6& batch
LGA.No.2 of 2017
Between:
Mohammed Nasirunnisa Begum
APPELLANT
AND
\
Shaik Saleema and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.3 of 2017
Between:
J.M.Bazul Ahhab
APPELLANT
AND
The Vizianagaram Municipality and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.5 of 2017
Between:
J.M.Zainul Abdeen
APPELLANT
AND
The Vizianagaram Municipality and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.7 of 2017
Between: j
Mohammed Amanuddin
APPELLANT
AND
Perupogu Mariyakumari and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.9 of 2017
•Between:
Nellore Masthanamma and Others
APPELLANT
AND
Kommi Sankaraiah
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.ll of 2017
Between:
Rizwana Sulthana, Hyderabad
APPELLANT
AND
Burri Anasuya Guntur and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
4 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch
LGA.No.12 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Cuddapah and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Penugonda Siva Prasad Cuddapah Town and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.13 of 2017
Between:
Padala Sanjeeva Rao and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Annabathina China Madhava Rao and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.17 of 2017
Between:
Ankem Krishna and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Rudrau Jagapathi Raju and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.18 of 2017
Between:
Kalepalli Samrajyam
APPELLANT
AND
Chintala Lakshmi Rajyam and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.24 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque
APPELLANT
AND
S Sattar and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.25 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Kadapa Dist and Others
APPELLANTS.
AND
S Ramthu Miah Kadapa Dist and Others
....RES.PONDENTS
«
RNT, J & MRK, J
'5 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
LGA.No.28 Of 2017
Between:
Sanka Koteswara Rao
APPELLANT
AND
Akumarthi Durgalaxmi and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.30 of 2017
Between:
Karri Akkulanaidu and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
The Tahsildar Visakhapatnam Dist
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.32 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosqque and Others
\ APPELLANTS
AND
\
\
P Showkar Ali Khan and Others i
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.lof 2024
\
\ Between:
Varanasi Satyanarayana
APPELLANT
AND
Goddu Sitamahalakshmi and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.2 of 2024
Between:
Gadiyaram Siddardtra Sankar Das
APPELLANTS
AND
Kolakattala Siva Rami Reddy and Others
RESPONDENTS
»
« RNT, J & MRK, J
6 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 2-6 .08.2025
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAI !
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
8i
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAOKUNCHEAM
1.
Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No
may be allowed to see the Judgments?
2.
Whether the copies of judgment may be ^es/No
marked to Law Reporters/Journals
3.
Whether Your Lordships wish to see the ^^es/No
fair copy of the Judgment?
/
«
RNT, J & MRK, J
LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
r-l 7
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM j
+ LAND GRABBING APPEAL Nos. 20,19, 21. 24, 25, 26, 27,
29. 31 of 2016,
1. 2. 3. 5. 7. 9. 11. 12. 13. 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32 of 2017,
and 1 & 2 of 2024
%i8.08.2025
LGA.No.20 of 2016
Between:
Shaik Masthan Vali, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Kummaru Durga Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.19 Of 2016
Between:
Meriga Mallikarjunaiah, Nellore Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Gorla Kousalyamma Nellore Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.21 of 2016
.Between:
Shaik Sulthan, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Kanchal Venkayamma Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.24 of 2016
Between:
Aabthina Chia Madhava Rao, Vja, Krishna Dist and Others
APPELLANTS
}
AND
Padala Sanjeeva Rao and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
8 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
t
LGA.No.25 of 201 fi
Between:
G. Sakunthalamma, Anantapur Dist & Another
APPELLANTS
AND
B Rameeja Anantapur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.26 of 2015
Between:
Ammen Shah Fakira Moque, Hyd and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
S Anwar Cuddapa Dist Nineteen and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.27 of 2016
Between:
«
Nagari Ramanamma, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Shaik Pyari Jan Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.29 of 2016
Between:
Gudikandula Prasad, Guntur Dist
APPELLANT
AND
Mahankali Aruna Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.31 of 2016
Between:
M V Jagannadham, Visakhapatnam
APPELLANT
AND
D Demudu Kothavalasa Mandal and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.l of 2017
Between:
Rajiya Sulthana, Hyderabad
APPELLANT
AND
Vemuia Punyavathi Guntur Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
9
LGA.No.2 of 2017
Between:
)
Mohammed Nasirunnisa Begum
APPELLANT
AND
Shaik Saleema and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.3 of 2017
Between:
J.M.Bazul Ahhab
APPELLANT
AND
The Vizianagaram Municipality and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.5 of 2017
Between:
J.M.Zainul Abdeen
APPELLANT
AND
The Vizianagaram Municipality and Others )
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.7 of 2017
Between:
Mohammed Amanuddin
APPELLANT
AND
Perupogu Mariyakumari and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.9 Of 2017
Between:
Nellore Masthanamma and Others
APPELLANT
AND
Kommi Sankaraiah
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.llof 2017
J
Between:
Rizwana Sulthana, Hyderabad
APPELLANT
AND
Burri Anasuya Guntur and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
10 LGA Nos.20 of2016 & batch
LGA.No.12 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Cuddapah and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Penugonda Siva Prasad Cuddapah Town and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.13 of 2017
Between:
Padala Sanjeeva Rao and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Annabathina China Madhava Rao and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.17 of 2017
Between:
t
Ankem Krishna and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
Rudrau Jagapathi Raju and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.18 of 2017
Between:
Kalepalli Samrajyam
APPELLANT
AND
Chintala Lakshmi Rajyam and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.24 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque
APPELLANT
i AND
S Sattar and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.25 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosque, Kadapa Dist and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
S Ramthu Miah Kadapa Dist and Others
RESPONDENTS
RNT, J & MRK, J
LGA Nos.20of20t6& batch
r
11
LGA.No.28 of 2017
Between: >
Sanka Koteswara Rao
APPELLANT
AND
Akumarthi Durgalaxmi and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.30 of 2017
Between:
Karri Akkulanaidu and Others
APPELLANTS
AND
The Tahsildar Visakhapatnam Dist
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.32 of 2017
Between:
Ameen Shah Fakira Mosqque and Others
APPELLANTS
)
AND
P Showkar Ali Khan and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.l of 2024
Between:
Varanast Satyanarayana
APPELLANT
AND
Goddu Sitamahalakshmi and Others
RESPONDENTS
LGA.No.2 of 2024
Between:
Gadiyaram Siddardha Sankar Das
APPELLANTS
AND
Kolakattala Siva Rami Reddy and Others
RESPONDENTS )
RNT, J & MRK, J
12 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
! Counsel for the Appellants : Sri T. N. M. Ranga Rao
In LGA No.9 of 2017
Sri Unnam Sravan Kumar,
In LGA No.l of 2024
(No other counsel appeared to argue
in remaining batch of Appeals)
Counsel for the Respondents : Sri Dammalapati Srinivas
Advocate General
For State Respondent
Sri S. Vivek Chandrasekhar,
Standing Counsel for APHC
Sri C. Venkaiah,
For Respondent in
{
LGA.No. 1/2024
Sri Kalangi Manohar,
For 2"^^ Respondent in
LGA. No. 1/2024
< Gist :
> Flead Note:
? Cases Referred:
1. LGA No.l of 2019, APHC
Decided on 28.08.2019
2. (2022) 6 see 704
3. AIR 1957 SC 540
4. AIR 1967 SC 344
5. (2022)2 see 161
6. (2014)5 sec 219
7. 2024 sec OnLine All 7422
8. (1989) 1 sec 345
9. AIR 1964 SC 648
10. (2003) 1 sec 506
11. 1992 Supp(l) sec 150
RNT, J & MRK, J
13 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
12. 2023 see OnLine Se 1584
13.<2025)2See 1
14. (2024) 3 see 799
15.(2024) 14 see 179
16. 2023 see OnLine Mad 1808
17. 2025 see OnLine SO 1009
)
18. (1955) 1 see 553
19. (2001) 6 see 534
20. (2903) 10 see 121
21. (2003) 6 see 675
22. 2012 see OnLine AP 573
)
J
RNT, J & MRK, J
14 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
n
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
&
THE HON^BL SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
LAND GRABBING APPEAL Nos. 20, 19. 21. 24, 25. 26, 27, 29,
31 of 2016.
Xr 3, 5, T, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32 of 2017.
and 1 & 2 of 2024
COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) \
The aforesaid batch of Land Grabbing Appeals involve common question
as to their maintainability in this Court under the Andhra Pradesh Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 1982 (in short 'the Act IQSZO.
2. L.G.A.No.l of 2024, in which also the same question is involved and
was reserved separately is also being decided with this batch.
3. Heard Sri T. N. M. Ranga Rao, learned counsel for the appellants in
LGA. No.9 of 2017. No other counsel appeared to advance the arguments for
the appellants in batch of Appeals.
4. We also heard Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, learned Advocate General for \
the State respondent.
5. We provided by the Order dated 02.04.2025 that the High Court of
Andhra Pradesh through Registrar General be also impleaded as party in one of
the appeals, LGA No.20 of 2016, which shall be the leading case of the batch of
appeals and such impleadment, only for the purpose of granting opportunity of
hearing to the High Court in view of there being the resolution by the
Administrative Committee of the then common High Court of Judicature for the
\ /
RNT, J & MRX, J
LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
15
State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh. As such the
impleadment was made.
6. VVe also heard Sri S. Vivek Chandrasekhar,learned standing counsel
for Andhra Pradesh High Court.
7. In LGA No.l of 2024 - We heard Sri Unnam Sravan Kumar, learned
t
counsel for the appellant, Sri C. Venkaiah, learned counsel for respondentNo.l
and Sri Kalangi Manohar, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
8. We would briefly refer to the facts of the aforesaid LGAs as follows:
I Facts:
i) LGA No.20 of 2016:
L.G.O.P.No.8 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibitipn) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
<
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.ll of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.ll of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.20 of 2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the
t
\
RNT. J & MRK., .1
16 LGA Nos.20of20l6& batch
< 1
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
in LGA No.19 of 2016:
O.P.No.7 of 1994 under Section 7 (2) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short'the Act 1982'), on the file of Special Tribunal
constituted under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act (Principal
District Judge) at Nellore, was filed by the respondents against the
appellant for direction to the respondent/appellant to deliver the site and award
, compensation of Rs.5,000/- by way of damages. The same was allowed vide
Order dated 18.11.2010. Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.3 of 2012 was
filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide
G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the
L.G.A.No.3 of 2012 was transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State
.of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as
L.G.A.No.19 of 2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the
jurisdiction of the District Court, Nellore, it was transferred to this Court,
maintaining the same number.
iin LGA No.21of 2016:
LG.O.P.No.lO of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
17 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.7 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
r
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA Sa AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.7 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.21 of 2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
ivJ LGA No.24 of 2016;
L.G.O.P.No.356 of 2008 under Sections 7 8i 8 of the A. P. band Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of District Judge,
Krishna, Machilipatnam, was filed by the appellants/applicants for eviction of
the respondents therein from the application schedule property and put the
applicants in possession of the same and award costs and compensation. The
same was dismissed vide Judgment dated 22.07.2013. Challenging the said
Judgment, L.G.A.No.20 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A <3) of the Act 1982
before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at
Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue
(EA 8i AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.20 of 2014 was
transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the
\
\ /
RNT, J & MRK,
18
LGA Nos.20of20l6&batcl^P
State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.24 of 2016.
After bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the
District Court, Krishna, Machilipatnam, it was transferred to this Court,
maintaining the same number.
LGA No.25 of 2Qlfi:
O.P.No.390 of 2005 under Section 7-A (1) and Section 8 (1) of the A. P.
Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of
• the Chairman, Tribunal under the Land Grabbing Act, Anantapur, was
filed by the appellants/applicants to declare the right of the applicants to the
petition schedule property and direct delivery of possession of the same. The
same was dismissed vide Order dated 14.06.2012. Challenging the said Order,
L.G.A.No.5 of 2013 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the
Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act at Hyderabad, After
abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR)
Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.ll of 2014 was transferred to the
High Court of Judicature for the Stale of Telangana and the State of Andhra
. Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.25 of 2016. After bifurcation of
the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court,
Anantapur, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same number.
Vi) LGA No.26 of 2016:
L.G.O.P.No.5 of 1990 under Section 7-A (1) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of the Special
Tribunal (District Judge) appointed under the Andhra Pradesh Land
RNT, J & MRK, J
19 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, at Cuddapah, was filed by the
appellants/applicants for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and to deliver the vacant possession of the same
to the applicants. The same was dismissed vide Judgment dated 11.12.1998.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.ll of 2000 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.11 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.26 of 2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Cuddapah, it was
transferred to this Court, maintaining the same number.
vin LGA No.27 of 2016:
LG.O.P.No.l of 2010 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of A. P. Land'
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 15.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.(SR)No.692 of 2014 was filed under Section
7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing '
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 at B. R. K. R. BIjavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After
\
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
20 LGA Nos.20of20l6& bate:
#
abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR)
Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.(SR)No.692 of 2014 was transferred
to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of
Andhra Pradesh, where it was numbered as L.G.A.No.27 of 2016. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District
Court, Guntur, it was transferred to thi$ Court, maintaining the same number,
viii) LGA No.29 of 2016:
LG.O.P.No.16 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
■ the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.l3 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
^ 1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.13 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.29 of 2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
21 LGA Nos.20of2016 & batch
ixV LGA No.31 of 2016:
L.G.O.P.No.34 of 2003 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of the Special
Tribunal-cum-District Judge at Vizianagaram, was filed by the
appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents from the schedule property
and put the applicant in vacant possession of the same. The same was
dismissed vide Order dated 15.06.2007. Challenging the said Order,
L.G.A.(SR)No.2992 of 2007 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982
before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at
Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue
(EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.(SR)No.2992 of 2007 was
transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the
State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was numbered as L.G.A.No.31 of 2016. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District
Court, Vizianagaram, it was transferred ot this Court, maintaining the same
number.
X) LGA No.l of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.13 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013. '
RNT, J & MRK, J
22
LGA Nos.20of2016& batcl^^
Chairenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.814 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A
(3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, 1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.814 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
• Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.l of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
xi) LGA No.2 of 2017:
LG.O.P.No.17 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction -of the respondents therein from the
. application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.5114 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A
(3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, 1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
.02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.5114 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.2 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
23 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch-
«r
matter related to the jurisdictionof the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
xin LGA No.3 of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.776 of 2004 under Section 7 of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of the Land
Grabbing Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram, was filed by the
appellant/applicant to declare him as ab^lute owner of the petition schedule
property and direct the respondents 7 to 17 therein to vacate the schedule
property and to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the same. The same
was dismissed vide Order dated 21.03.2014. Challenging the said Order,
L.G.A.(SR)No.l693 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982
before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at
Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue
(EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.(SR)No.l693 of 2014 was
transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the
State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was numbered as L.G.A.No.3 of 2017. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District
Court, Vizianagaram, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same-
number.
xiii) LGA No.5 of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.775 of 2004 under Section 7 of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of the Land
Grabbing Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram, was filed by the
RNT. J & MRK.
n 24
LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batdlfp
appellant/applicant to declare him as absolute owner of the petition schedule
property and direct the respondents 7 to 11 therein to vacate the schedule
property and to put the petitioner in vacant possession of the same. The same
«
was dismissed vide Order dated 21.03.2014. Challenging the said Order,
• L.G.A.(SR)No.l696 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982
before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at
Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue
(EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the LG.A.(SR)No.l696 of 2014 was
transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the
State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was numbered as L.G.A.No.5 of 2017. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District
Court, Vizianagaram, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same
number.
Xiv) LGA No.7 of 2017;
LG.O.P.No.18 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
■ the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.lO of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
RNT, J & MRK, j
25 LGA Nos.20 of2016 & batch
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.lO of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.7 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
vJ LGA No.9 Of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.5 of 2003 under Section 7 of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of the Chairman,
Tribunal constituted under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act
(Principal District Judge) at Nellore, was filed by the respondent against
the appellants for declaration that the applicant/respondent is the absolute
owner of the petitioner schedule property and for eviction of the respondents
therein therefrom and for damages. The same was allowed vide Order dated
17.08.2011. Challenging the said Order, the respondents therein filed
LG.A.No.13 of 2011 under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the Special
Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.13 of 2011 was transferred to the High Court of-
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.9 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Nellore, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
\
RNT.J&MRK.J
LGA Nos.20of20I6&batct^^
26
xvi^ LGA No.ll of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.14 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the'Act 1982'), on the file of A. P. Land
. Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.l2 of 2014 was filed under Section 7-A (3)
of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
■1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.l2 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
^ Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.ll of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number,
xvii) LGA No.12 of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.4 of 1990 under Section 7-A (1) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of the Special
Tribunal (District Judge) appointed under the Andhra Pradesh Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1082, at Cuddapah, was filed by the
appellants/applicants for declaration of the sale deeds of the respondents 1, 3,
i
6 and 9 therein, if any, as null and void, to declare the leases made by
RNT, J & mrk, j
# 27 , LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
©
respondents 1, 3, 6 and 9 to the respondents 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 therein as
void in law and not binding on the applicants therein and to order all the
respondents therein to deliver vacant possession of the land occupied by them,
as described in the schedule property to the petitioners. The same was
dismissed vide Judgment dated 11.12.1998. Challenging the said judgment,
L.G.A.No.10 of 2000 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the
Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at Hyderabad. After
abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) '
Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.*No.l0 of 2000 was transferred to the
High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Apdhra
Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.l2 of 2017. After bifurcation of
the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court,
Cuddapah, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same number,
xviii) LGA No.l3 of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.356 of 2008 under Sections 7 & 8 of the A. P. Land Grabbing)
Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of District Judge, Krishna,
Machilipatnam, was filed by the appellants/applicants for eviction of the '
respondents therein from the applicati9n schedule property and put the
applicants in possession of the same and award costs and compensation. The
same was allowed in part vide Judgment dated 22.07.2013. Challenging the.
said Judgment, L.G.A.No.3 of 2014 was filed by the respondents therein under
Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 at Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide
\
r RNT, J & MRK, J ^
28 LGA Nos.20or20l6&batch(®
G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the
L.G.A.No.3 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State
' of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as
L.G.A.No.13 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the matter reiated to the
jurisdiction of the District Court, Krishna, Machiiipatnam, it was transferred to
this Court, maintaining the same number.
xix) LGA No.17 of 7017-
LG.O.P.No.342 of 1997 under Sections 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land
■Grabbing) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of District Judge,
Krishna, Machiiipatnam, was filed by the applicant/respondent for eviction of
the respondents therein from the 'petition schedule property and put the
. applicant in possession of the same. The same was allowed vide Judgment
dated 25.04.2016. Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.l7 of 2017 was filed
by the respondents therein under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the
High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra
Pradesh as the Special Courts were abolished vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA
& AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Krishna, Machiiipatnam, it
was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same number.
XX) LGA No.18 of 7017; .
L.G.O.P.No.341 of 1997 under Sections 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land
Grabbing) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of District Judge,
Krishna, Machiiipatnam, was filed by the applicant/respondent for eviction of
RNT, J & MRK, J
29 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch )
the respondents therein from the petition schedule property and redeliver the
same to the applicant. The same was allowed vide Judgment dated 25.04.2016.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.18 of 2017 was filed by the 1^ respondent
therein under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andbra Pradesh as the
Special Courts were abolished vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR)
Department, dated 02.09.2016. After bifurcation of the State, as the matter
related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Krishna, Machilipatnam, it was
transferred to this Court, maintaining the same number,
xxi) LGA No.24 of 2017:
O.S.No.l of 1994 was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and for
delivery of possession of the plaint schedule properties on the file of District'
Judge, Cuddapah, and the same was dismissed along with connected LGOPs
vide common Judgment dated 11.12.1998. Challenging the said judgment, the
plaintiff filed A.S.No.l717 of 1999 before the High Court of Judicature for the
State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. The appeal was re
numbered as LGA.24 of 2017, as per office Order, dated 29.09.2008. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District'
Court, Cuddapah, it was transferred tq this Court, maintaining the same
number.
xxiij LGA No.25 of 2017:
O.S.No.2 of 1994 was filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and for
delivery of possession of the plaint schedule properties on the file of District
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
30 LG A Nos.20of20l6& batch
Judge, Cuddapah, and the same was dismissed along with connected LGOPs
' vide common Judgment dated 11.12.1998. Challenging the said judgment, the
plaintiff filed A.S.No.l765 of 1999 before the High Court of Judicature for the
State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. The appeal was re
numbered as LGA.25 of 2017, as per office Order, dated 29.09.2008. After
bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the District
Court, Cuddapah, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the same
number.
xxiii) L6A No.28 of 2017:
LG.O.P.No.15 of 2009 under Section 7-A(l) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
. (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 1982'), on the file of A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) at Guntur, was filed by
the appellant/applicant for eviction of the respondents therein from the
application schedule property and surrender vacant possession of the same to
the applicant. The same was dismissed vide Order dated 25.07.2013.
Challenging the said Order, L.G.A.No.6 of 2014 vyas filed under Section 7-A (3)
•of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
1982 at B. R. K. R. Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. After abolition of the
Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated
^ 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.6 of 2014 was transferred to the High Court of
Judicature for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it
was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.28 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the
\ /
RNT, J & MRK, J
31 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
matter related to the jurisdiction of the District Court, Guntur, it was transferred
to this Court, maintaining the same number.
xxiv^ LGA No.30 of 2017:
LG.C.No.25 of 1994 under Section 7(1) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of the Principal
District Judge-cum-Special Court constituted under A. P. Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at Visakhapatnam, was filed by the
appticant/respondent for declaration that the respondents therein as land
grabbers and to evict them from the schedule property. The same was allowed
vide judgment dated 30.06.2010. Challenging the said judgment, L.G.A.No.2 of
2012 was filed under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court
under Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 at Hyderabad by the respondents
in L.G.C.IMo.25 of 1994. After abolition of the Special Court vide G.O.Ms.No.420
Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the L.G.A.No.2 of 2012 was
transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and the
State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was re-numbered as L.G.A.No.30 of 2017.
After bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to the jurisdiction of the
District Court, Visakhapatnam, it was transferred to this Court, maintaining the
same number.
xxvJ LGA No.32 of 2017:
L.G.O.P.No.7 of 1990 under Section 7-A (1) of the A. P. Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the Act 19820, on the file of the Special-
V Tribunal (District Judge) appointed under the Andhra Pradesh Land
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
32 LG A Nos.20of20l6& batch
• Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, at Cuddapah, was filed by the
appellants/applicants for eviction and delivery of possession of the schedule
property. The same was dismissed vide common Judgment dated 11.12.1998.
Challenging the said judgment, L.G.A.No.l3 of 2000 was filed under Section 7-A
(3) of the Act 1982 before the Special Court under Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
Act, 1982 at Hyderabad. After abolition of the Special Court vide
G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, the
L.G.A.No.13 of 2000 was transferred to the High Court of Judicature for the
State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, where it was re-numbered
. as L.G.A.No.32 of 2017. After bifurcation of the State, as the matter related to
the jurisdiction of the District Court, Cuddapah, it was transferred to this Court,
maintaining the same number.
xxvi) LGA No.2 of 2024:
AP LGOP.No.Ol of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Judge,
Prakasam at Ongole, was filed by the appellant/applicant for eviction and
•delivery of possession of the schedule property. The same was dismissed vide
Judgment dated 18.06.2024. Challenging the said judgment, L.G.A.No.2 of
2024 was filed under Section 7-A (3)* of the Act 1982 before this Court, as the
Special Courts were abolished as per G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR)
Department, dated 02.09.2016.
9* In LGA.No.l of 2024 the facts are as follows:
i) The appellant-Varanasi Satyanarayana filed L.G.O.P.No.l93 of 2015 (in
Ihort 'LGOP') under Section 1 (8) (1) of Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
33 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
9
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (in short 'the ActO to declare the respondents No.l & 2
as land grabbers and to evict them from the petition schedule property and
deliver vacant possession of the same to the applicant. The LGOP was filed in
the Court of the Principal District Judge, West Godavari at Eluru.
ii) Respondents No.l and 2 filed counter/defence, denying the applicant
as the absolute owner and also the identity of the property by submitting that
the schedule property boundaries were not properly mentioned. They also
denied to have encroached or grabbed the vacant property and submitted that
the authorities gave the enjoyment certificate to them and they were paying
the property tax and special taxes. Various other pleas were also raised,
iii) The respondent Tahsildar, Eluru Mandal, Eluru also filed defence,
inter alia, raising the plea that on physical verification of the site in Town and
Government records, the site wherein the respondents 1 and 2 were said to
have made encroachments was the canal poramboke, the government land and'
any dispute with respect thereto was beyond the jurisdiction of the Court in
LGOP. Various other pleas were also taken including about W.P.No.5761 of
2015, as also W.P.No.167 of 2015, in which some interim orders were passed.
iv) LGOP No. 193 of 2015 was finally dismissed by the learned Principal
District Judge, West Godavari on 26.02.2024, recording the findings, inter alia,
that the respondents 1 and 2 could not be said as the land grabbers and they '
could not be evicted, as the matter was also sub judice before the High Court,
v). Challenging the Order, dated 26.02.2024 the present appeal under
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
34 LGA Nos.20or20l6& batch
Section 7A (3) of the Act read with Rule 16 of the A.P.Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Rules, 1988 (in short'the Rules 1988') has been filed.
10. Thus, the Appeals mentioned in para-5, SI.Nos. (i) to (xviii), (xxiii),
(xxiv) and (xxv) arise out of the Orders passed by the Special Tribunal under
the Act 1982 and against the said Orders, the Appeals were filed before the
Special Court constituted under the said Act. But after G.O.Ms.No.420, dated
02.09.2016, those Appeals were transferred to the erstwhile High Court of
Andhra Pradesh, from where, on bifurcation of the State, the Appeals were
• allotted to this Court on the point of territorial jurisdiction.
11. The Appeals at SI.Nos. (xix) and (xx) against the Order of the Special
Tribunal under the Act 1982 were filed in the erstwhile High Court of Andhra
Pradesh as by that time the Special Courts were abolished vide G.O.Ms.No.420,
dated 02.09.2016. After bifurcation of the State, the Appeals were allotted to
this Court on the point of territorial jurisdiction.
12. The Appeals at SI.Nos. (xxi) and (xxii) were also filed before the
District Judge, Kadapa and against the Orders, initially A.S (s) were filed in the
erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, where they were re-numbered as Land
, Grabbing Appeals. After bifurcation of the State, the Appeals were allotted to
this Court on the point of territorial jurisdiction.
13. The Appeal at SI.No.(xxvi) arises out of the LGOP filed before the
Special Tribunal under the Act 1982 and against the Order dated 18.06.2024
the Appeal has been filed in this Court under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982.
\
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
35 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
14. So far as the Appeal mentioned in Para-6 (supra) is concerned, the
same arises out of the Order of the Special Tribunal and against the Order of
dismissal dated 26.02.2024, the Appeal has been filed in this Court under
Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982.
15. So, there are two sets of Appeals. One, finally transferred to the
erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which were pending before the Special
Court under the Act 1982 filed under Section 7-A (3) of the said Act in view of
the abolition of the Special Courts vide G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016. The
other set of appeals are those which have been filed in the High Court of
Andhra Pradesh either erstwhile or present after reorganization, directly, after
the Order of the Special Tribunal, in view of its abolition vide G.O.Ms.No.420,
dated 02.09.2016. But all the Appeals are filed under the Act 1982.
II Point for consideration;
16.The point for determination is the maintainability of the Land
Grabbing Appeals before the High Court under the Act 1982.
17. We heard on the point of maintainability of the appeal before this
Court under Section 7A (3) of the A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982.
Ill Consideration / Analysis:
18. To consider the above point, we would refer to the provisions of the
Act 1982.
i) Statutory Provisions:
19. Section 7A of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act,
'^982 reads as under:
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
36 LG A Nos.20of20l6& batch
"7A. Special Tribunals and its powers, etc.
(1) Every Special Tribunal shall have power to try all cases not taken
cognizance of by the Special Court relating to any alleged act of land grabbing,
or with respect to the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of the land
grabbed whether before or after the commencement of the Andhra Pradesh
Land Grabbing (Prohibition) (Amendment) Act, 1987 and brought before it and
pass such orders (including orders by way of interim directions) as it deems fit:
Provided that if, in the opinion of the Special Tribunal, any case brought
before it is prima facie frivolous, or vexatious it shall reject the same without
any further enquiry:
Provided further that if, in the opinion of the Special Tribunal any case
brought before it is a fit case to be tried by the Special Court it may for reasons
to be recorded by it transfer the case to the Special Court for its decision in the
matter.
(2) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, a Special Tribunal shall, in the
trial of cases before it, follow the procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908.
(3) An appeal shall lie, from any judgment or order not being
interlocutory order of the Special Tribunal, to the Special Court on any
question of law or of fact. Every appeal under this sub-section shall be
preferred within a period of sixty days from the date of Judgment or order
of the Special Tribunal:
Provided that the Special Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of
the said period of sixty days, if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient
cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of sixty days.
(4) Every finding of the Special Tribunal with regard to any alleged act of
land grabbing shall be conclusive proof of the fact of land gi'abbing, and of the
persons who committed such land grabbing and every Judgment of the Special
Tribunal with regard to the determination of the title and ownership to, or
lawful possession of, any land grabbed shall be binding on ail persons having
interest in such land:
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
37 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch
Provided that the Special Tribunal shall by notification specify the fact of
taking cognizance of the case under this Act. Such notification shall state that
any objection which may be received by the Special Tribunal from any person
including the custodian of evacuee property within the period specified therein
will be considered by it:
Provided further that where the custodian of evacuee property objects to
the Special Tribunal taking cognizance of the case, the Special Tribunal shall
not proceed further with the case in regard to such property:
Provided also that the Special Tribunal shall cause a notice of taking
cognizance of the case under the Act served on any person known or believed
to be interested in the land, after a summary enquiry to satisfy itself about the
persons likely to be interested in the land.
(5) It shall be lawful for the Special Tribunal to pass an order in any
case decided by it, awarding compensation in terms of money for wrongful
possession, which shall not be less than an amount equivalent to the market
value of the land grabbed as on the date of the order and profits accrued fi-om
the land payable by the land grabber to the owner of the grabbed land and may
direct the re-delivery of the grabbed land to its rightful owner. The amount of
compensation and profits so awarded and cost of re-delivery, if any, shall be
recovered as an arfear of land revenue if the Government are the owner or as a
decree of a Civil Court, in any other case:
Provided that the Special Tribunal shall, before passing an order under
this sub-section, give to the land grabber an opportunity of making his
representation or of adducing evidence, if any, in this regard and consider every
such representation and evidence.
(6) Any case, pending before any Court or other authority immediately
before the commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition)
(Amendment) Act, 1987 as would have been within the jurisdiction of a Special
Tribunal, shall stand transferred to the Special Tribunal, having jurisdiction, as
if the cause of action on which such suit or proceeding is based had arisen after
such commencement.
\
RNT, J & MRK, J
38 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
(7) Every case brought before the Special Tribunal shall be disposed of
finally by the Special Tribunal, as far as possible, within a period of six months
from the date of its having been brought before it.
(8) The Special Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for
purposes of review."
20. A perusal of the Section 7A makes it clear that under sub-section (3)
an appeal lies from any judgment or order not being interlocutory order of the
'Special Tribunal', to the 'Special Court' on any question of law or of fact.
21. The period of limitation has been prescribed for filing appeal. The
power has also been conferred on the Special Court to entertain the appeal
after the expiry of the period of limitation on being satisfied that there is
sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation.
22. The 'Special Tribunal' has been defined under Section 2 (i-b) as
under:
Section 2: Definitions:
(i-b): "Special Tribunal means a Court of the District Judge having
. jurisdictionover the area concerned and includes Chief Judge, City Civil Court,
Hyderabad
23. The "Special Court" has been defined under Section 2 (i-a) as under:
"(i-a): Special Court" means a Special Court constituted under Section 7"
24, Section 7 of the Act 1982 reads as under:
Section7. Constitution of Special Courts- (1) The Government may, for the
purpose of providing speedy enquiry into any alleged act of land grabbing, and
I trial of cases in respect of the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of,
the land grabbed, by notification, constitute 1 [a Special Court],
RNT, J & MRK, J
39 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
(2) A Special Court shall consist of a Chairman and four other members, to
be appointed by the Government.
(3) The Chairman shall be a person who is or has been a Judge of a High
Court and of the other four members, two shall be persons who are or have been
District Judges (hereinafter referred to as Judicial Members) mid the other two
members shall be persons who hold or have held a post not below the rank of a
District Collector (hereinafter referred to as Revenue Members).
Provided that the appointment of a person who was a Judge of a High Court
as the Chairman of the Special Court shall be made after consultation with the
Chief Justice of the High Court concerned:
Provided further that where a sitting Judge of a High Court is to be
appointed as Chairman, such appointment shall be made after nomination by
the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, with the concurreiice of the
Chief Justice of India.
(4) The Government may, from time to time likewise, reconstitute the
Special Court constituted under sub-section (1) or may, at any time,
abolish such Special Court.
(4A) The Chairman or other member shall hold office as such for a term of
two years from the date on which he enters upon his office, or until the Special
Court is reconstituted or abolished under sub-section (4), whichever is earlier.
(4B)(a) Subject to the other provision^ of this Act, the jurisdiction, powers
and authority of the Special Court may be exercised by benches thereof one
comprising of the Chairman, a judicial member and a Revenue member and the
other comprising of a Judicial Member and a Revenue Member,
(b) Where the bench comprises of the Chairman, he shall be the Presiding
Officer of such a bench and where the bench consists of two members, the
Judicial Member shall be the Presiding Officer,
(c) It shall be competent for the Chairman either suo motu or On a reference
made to him to Avithdraw any case pending before the bench comprisingof two
members and dispose of the same or to transfer any ease from one bench to
another beneh in the interest of justice.
RNT, J & MRK, J
40 LGA Nos.20of20I6& batch
n
(d) Where it is reasonably apprehended that the trial of Civil Liability of a
person aceused of an offence under this Act, is likely to take considerable time,
it shall be competent tor the Chairman to entrust the trial of the criminal
liability of such offender to another bench in the interest of speedy disposal of
the case.
(e) Where a case under this Act ds heard by a bench cansisting of two
members and the members thereof are divided in opinion, the case with their
opinions shall be laid before another judicial member or the Chairman and that
member or Chairman, as the case may be after such hearing as he thinks fit,
shall deliver his opinion and the decision or order shall follow that opinion.
(5) The quorum to constitute a meeting of any bench of the Special Court
shall be two.
(5A) The Special Court may, by notification, make regulations not
inconsistent with the provisions of this Act or the rules m.ade thereunder
relating to the procedure to be followed for the conduct of the cases and for
regulating the maimer of taking decisions.
(5B) The Special Court may cause a public notice of the substance of such
regulations for the information of the general public.
(5C) Every regulation made under this section shall, immediately after it is
made, be laid before the Legislative Assembly of the State if it is in session, and
if It IS not in session in the session immediately following for a total period of
fourteen days which may be comprised in one session or in two successive
sessions and if before the expiration of the session in which it is so laid or the
session immediately following the Legislative Assembly agrees in making any
modifications in the regulation or in the annulment of the regulation, the
regulation shall from the date on which the modification or annulment is
notified, have effect only in such modified fomi or shall stand annulled, as the
case may be, so however that any such modification or annulments shall be
without\ prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that
regulatioft.
(5D) (i)bJotwithstanding an3thing in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V
of 1908) the Special Court may follow its own procedure which shall not be
RNT, J & MRK, J
41 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
inconsistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play and subject to the
other provisions of this Act and of any rules made thereunder while deciding
the Civil liability,
(ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 260 or Section 262 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) every offence punishable under
this Act shall be tried in a summary way and the provisions of Sections 263 to
265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far as may be, apply to such trial,
(iii) When a person is convicted of an offence of land grabbing attended by
criminal force or show of force or by criminal intimidation, and it appears to the
Special Court that, by such force or show of force or intimidation the land of
any person has been grabbed, the Special Court may if it thinks fit, order that
possession of the same be restored to that person after evicting by force, if
necessary, any other person who may be in possession of the property.
(6) No act or proceeding of l[the Special Court] shall be deemed to be
invalid by reason only of the existence of any vacancy among its members or
any defect in the constitution or re-constitution thereof"
25. As per Sub-Section (2) of Section 7 of the Act, the Special Court
consists of a Chairman and four other members to be appointed by the
Government. Sub-section (3) provides for the Chairman, who is or has been a
Judge of a High Court and of the other four members, two shall be the persons,
who are or have been District Judges, as Judicial Members, and the other two
members shall be persons who hold or have held a post not below the rank of a
District Collector. Under sub-section (4), the Government has the power to
reconstitute and may also abolish such Special Court.
/
RNT, J & MRK, J
42 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
ii) G.O.Ms.No.420. dated 02.09.2nifi:
26.
In exercise of powers under Section 7 (4) of the Act 1982, the
G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 was notified, inter alia, to abolish the Special
Court.
27. G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 reads as under:
"GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
The Andhra Prade.sh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (Act No. 12 of
1982) - Abolition of Special Court constituted under the Andhra Pradesh Land
Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 and transfer of the pending cases under the
Act No. 12 of 1982 to the respective Civil Courts in the State of Andhra Pradesh
- Notification - Issued.
REVENUE (EA&AR) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.420 Dated: 02-09-2016
Read the following:
. 1. Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (Act No. 12 of 1982)
2. G.O.Ms.No.561, Desk Officer (LR) Revenue Department, Dated 04-08-1988
3. Lr.Dis.No.229/2016/Reqr/Estt/SC of the Registrar, Special Court under Andhra
Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, dated: 04-06-2016.
ORDER:
Whereas, in the reference 2"'* read above. Government have issued notification for constitution of Special Court under Sub-Section (1) read with sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act for the purpose of providing speedy enquiry into any alleged act of land grabbing, and trial of cases in respect of the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of, the land grabbed.
2. In the reference 3"^^ read above, the Registrar I/c.Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 has made certain proposals for appointment of members to the Special Court. The proposal has been examined ^ and it was decided not to utilize the services of Special Court under A.P. ^Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, as only small number of cases are ^ pending in respect of the residuary State of Andhra"Pradesh.
RNT, J & MRK, J 43 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
3. Government after careful examination of the matter, have decided to abolish the Special Court constituted under the provisions of Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 and to transfer the pending cases under the said Act to the respective Civil Courts in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Accordingly, the following notification will be published in an Extra ordinate issue of State of Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated; 02-09-2016.
NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 7 of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (Act 12 of 1982), the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby abolish the Special Court constituted under the provisions of Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982; save as otherwise provided hereunder:
(i) All cases of post cognizance pending before the Special Court relating to the State of Andhra Pradesh along with the notification charges that were deposited by the parties to the case and lying to the credit of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act shall stand transferred to the Principal district Judges of the respective District Courts in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the pending cases shall be tried and disposed off as Land Grabbing Original Petitions (LGOPs) in terms of Act 12 of 1982.
(ii) All Land Grabbing Case S.Rs (LGCSRs) and Taken Up Cases relating to the State of Andhra Pradesh that are pending for taking cognizance shall stand transferred to Principal District Judges of the respective District Courts in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the said cases shall be tried and disposed off as Land Grabbing Original Petitions (LGOPs) in terms of said Act 12 of 1982.
(iii) All Land Grabbing Appeal S.Rs (LGASRs) relating to the State of Andhra Pradesh that are pending for taking cognizance and Transfer Suit(s) that are received from the Hon'ble High Court for trial along with the pending cases before this Court, shall stand transferred to Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The LGASRs shall be disposed off in terms of Act of 1982.
(iv) All the disposed cases relating to the State of Andhra Pradesh shall stand transferred to respective District Courts in Andhra Pradesh for preservation of disposed records in the District Courts.
(V) The personnel working under the control of the Special Court who are allotted to the State of Andhra Pradesh shall be transferred by way of accommodating them in the office of the Spl.CS&CCLA or as the Government of Andhra Pradesh may decide, by an appropriate order.
RNT, J & MRK, J 44 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
5. The Registrar (I/c), Special Court Under Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad shall take necessary action accordingly. 4 (BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH) J.C.SHARMA SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
iii) Submissions of learned counsels & the Report of the Registrar Judicial:
28. Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, learned Advocate General, on 02.04.2025 submitted and such submission is on record in the Order dated 02.04.2025 in •the batch of the Appeals that the G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 was issued by the Government without any prior approval or consultation with the High Court, but after G.O.Ms.No.420, the then administrative committee of the ^ common High Court consisting of seven Hon'ble Judges resolved to direct the Registrar, Land Grabbing Court, Hyderabad for transferring ail the cases pending before the Special Court at the time of abolition, to the High Court to be decided by it.
29. Report was also called from the Registrar Judicial, Andhra Pradesh High Court, on the aspect of filing of the Appeals before this Court under which provision of law, as also various appeals which were transferred to this Court from the Special Court under the Act 1982, which .Special Court was abolished vide G.O.Ms.No.420, then also by virtue of what provision of law.
t
30. The Registrar Judicial submitted the report dated 27.03.2025 to the effect that vide resolution dated 20.10.2016 on subject No.4 of the then administrative committee of the common High Court of Judicature for the State RNT, J & MRK, J 45 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh resolved to direct the Registrar, Land Grabbing Court, Hyderabad to transfer;
(a) All pending Land Grabbing cases, post cognizance stage, to respective District Courts.
(b)AII pending Land Grabbing cases, at pre-cognizance stage, to respective District Courts.
(c)AII Land Grabbing Appeals, Land Grabbing Suits and the Land Grabbing Appeals at SR stage to the Hon'ble High Court of' Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh.
(d)AII disposed case records pertaining to the District Courts to the respective Districts for preservation.
Pursuant to the aforesaid, the Registrar of the Land Grabbing Court, Hyderabad had transferred the respective cases to the High Court for disposal in accordance with law.
31. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Section 7A sub section (3) provides for an appeal from the judgment or order, other than the interlocutory order of a Special Tribunal to the Special Court on any question of law or of fact. He submitted that the Special Court was abolished vide G.O.Ms.No.420 Revenue (EA & AR) Department, dated 02.09.2016, but in spite- thereof, in his submission, the appeal would be maintainable, as the statute provides the remedy of appeal under Section 7A (3) of the Act and in the absence of the Forum of the Special Court, the appeal shall lie to the High RNT, J & MRK, J 46 l.GA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch. Court. He submitted that the constitution of the Special Courts is provided by _ Section 7 of the Act and under sub-section (4), the Government from time to time likewise reconstitute the Special Court constituted under sub-section (1) or may, at any time abolish such Special Court. Referring to the notification G.O.Ms.No.420, clause (iii), he submitted that all Land Grabbing Appeal S.Rs (LGASRs) relating to the State of Andhra Pradesh that were pending for taking cognizance and Transfer Suits that were received from the High Court for trial along with the pending cases before the Special Court, shall stand transferred to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The LGASRs shall be disposed of in terms of the Act 1982. Based thereon, he submitted that the present appeal would be maintainable before the High Court even after abolition of the Special Court, t
32. Learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance in the case of PatU ChandramouUswar Reddy v. Madige Pedda Dasthagirf, to contend that Section 7A of the Act states about the constitution of the Special Tribunal. A . Special Court constituted in terms of Section 7 of the Act, as defined in Section 2 (i) (ia) of the Act, is a Forum, which has jurisdiction over the then State of Andhra Pradesh, which is now abolished.
33. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 & 2 in LGA No.l of 2024 submitted that the respondents have filed counter affidavit, supporting the judgment of the Principal District Judge, in which there is no illegality. I
34. On the point of maintainability, he submitted that the Act 1982 provides for appeal before the Special Court but by G.O.Ms.No.420, dated LGA No.l of 2019, ,APHC Decided on 28.08.2019 RNT, J & MRK, J 47 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch 02.09.2016 while abolishing Special Court, pending appeals have been passed- to the High Court for decision under the Act 1982. He submitted that, otherwise, the High Court is not the appeHate Court under the Act 1982.
iv) Right of Appeal and AppeMate Forum:
35. It is the settled principle of law that, the Right of Appeal is not a matter of procedure but is a substantive Right. The institution of a suit carries with it the implication that all remedies in force at the time of the filing of the suit were to be preserved to the parties tNI the rest of the career of the suit.
The appeal or a remedy to go to higher Court accrues to a litigant on the very • date the Hs commences and although it may be actually exercised when the adverse judgment is pronounced, such right is to be governed by the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit.
36. It is also well settled position in law that any repealing law which repeals an earlier law shall not affect the remedies available to a party which were available to the party on the date when the suit was fiied. It would continue to be in existence for the litigant just as it was available to him or to her on the date of the filing the Us. However, a vested right to go to a higher Court can be taken away by the subsequent enactment, if the latter expressely provides or a bare reading of it shows that the right of going to a higher Court as per the earlier law had been taken away by a necessary intendment.
37. The Hon'ble Apex Court in ECGC Limited v. Mokui Shriram EPC JV^ with respect to the accrual of the Right of Appeal and Right to Forum, ^ (2022) 6 see 704 \ RNT, J & MRK, J 48 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch referred to the Constitution Bench judgment in Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry^ and held in para-12 as under, in which, in sub-para 23, the following principles were laid down.
12. Subsequently, the Constitution Bench in a judgment in Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry [Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry, AIR 1957 SC 540] approved the judgment in Hoosein Kasam Dada [Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) Ltd. v. State of.MP., (1953) 1 SCC 299 : 1953 SCR 987 :
AIR 1953 SC 221] , though the issue was in respect of right of appeal to the Federal Court under the Government of India Act, 1935. The argument was that the appellant had a right to file an appeal as the suit, out of which the proceedings arose before this Court, was filed on 22-4-1949. Hence, he had acquired a vested right to appeal to the Federal Court which has since been . replaced by the Supreme Court. It was the said argument which was accejited by the Constitution Bench when the following principles were delineated :
{Garikapati Veeraya case [Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry, AIR 1957 SC 540], AIR p. 553, paras 23-24) '23. From the decisions cited above the following principles clearly emerge: (/) That the legal pursuit of a remedy, suit, appeal and second appeal are really but steps in a series of proceedings all connected by an intrinsic unity and are to be regarded as one legal proceeding.
(/■/) The right of appeal is not a mere matter of procedure but is a substantive right.
{in) The institution of the suit carries with it the implication that all irghts of appeal then in force are preserved to the parties thereto till the rest of the career of the suit, (/v) The right of appeal is a vested right and such a right to enter the superior court accrues to the litigant and exists as on and from the date the lis commences and although it may be actually exercised when the adverse judgment is pronounced such right is to be governed by the law prevailing at AIR 1957 SC 540 RNT, J & MRK, J 49 LGA iMos.20 of 2016 & batch the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal,
(v) This vested right of appeal can be taken away only by a subsequent enactment, if it so provides expressly or by necessary intendment and not otherwise."
38. The Hon'ble Apex Court referred to the Constitution Bench judgment in Vitthaibhai Naranbhai Pate! v. CSt* wherein it was observed that when a //5 commences, all rights get crystalised and no dog upon a likely appeal can be put, unless the law was made retrospective, expressly or by clear implication.
39. From Section 7 of the Act, it is evident that the High Court is not the Special Court under Section 2 (i) (i-a) read with Section 7. There is no dispute . on this aspect, as it is also submitted by the appellant's counsel that the High Court is not the Special Court for the purposes of the Act. So, it becomes clear that under the Act, from the Order of the Special Tribunal, the appeal lies to the Special Court, but not to the High Court.
40. The law is also well settled with respect to the Forum that Right to Forum is not an accrued right. In Neena Aneja v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd.^ it was held that right to forum is not an accrued right. Section 6(e) of the General Clauses Act protects the pending legal proceeding for enforcement of the accrued right from the effect of repeal; it does not mean the legal proceeding at a particular forum was saved from the effect of repeal. Referring to the said judgment in Neena Aneja (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court in ECGC Z.//77/Ze</(supra) observed in Pafa-29 as under:
AIR 1967 sc 344 ^ (2022^ SGC 161 RNT, J & MRK, J 50 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch
29. It is to be noted that xn Neena Aneja [Neena Anejav.Jai Prakash Associates Ltd., (2022) 2 SCC 161 : (2022) 1 SCC (Civ) 768] , this Court held that right to forum is not an accrued right. Section 6(c) of the General Clauses Act protects the pending legal proceeding for enforcement of the accrued right from the effect of repeal; it does not mean the legal proceeding at a particular forum was saved from the effect of repeal. This Court found that there was no express intention in the repealing enactment that all pending cases would stand transferred to the fora created under the 2019 Act. This Court held as under :
(SCC pp. 216 & 219, paras 83-84 & 89) "55. Having stated the above position, we need to harmonise it with the principle that the right to a forum is not an accrued right, as discussed in Part Cof this judgment. Simply put, while Section 6(e) of the General Clauses Act protects the pending legal proceedings for the enforcement of an accrued right from the effect of a repeal, this does not mean that the legal proceedings at a particular forum are saved from the effects from the repeal. The question whether the pending legal proceedings are required to be transferred to the newly created forum by virtue of the repeal would still persist. As discussed, this Court in New India Assurance [New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Shanti Misra, (1975) 2 SCC 840] and Maria Cristina [Maria Cristina De Souza Sodder V. Amria Zurana Pereira Pinto, (1979) 1 SCC 92] has held that forum is a matter pertaining to procedural law and therefore the litigant has to pursue the legal proceedings at the forum created by the repealing Act, unless a contrary intention appears. This principle would also apply to pending proceedings , as observed in Ramesh Kumar Soni [Ramesh Kumar Soni v. State ofM.P., (2013) 14 SCC 696 : (2014) 4 SCC (Cri) 340] .Hitendra Vishnu Thakur [Hitendra Vishnu Thakur w. State of Maharashtra, (1994) 4 SCC 602 ; 1994 SCC (Cri) 1087] and Sudhir G. Angur [Sudhir G. Angur v. M. Sanjeev, (2006) 1 SCC 141] . In tnis backdrop, what is relevant to ascertain is whether a contrary intent to the genera] rule of retrospect!vity has been expressed under the 2019 Act to continue the proceedings at the older forum.
\ 84. Now, in considering the expression ot intent in the repealing enactment \ in the present case, it is apparent that there is no express language indicating RNT, J & MRK, J 51 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch that ail pending cases would stand transferred to the fora created by the 2019 Act by applying its newly prescribed pecuniary limits. In deducing whether there is a contrary intent, the legislative scheme and procedural history may provide a relevant insight into the intention of the legislature.
41. In H. P. State Electricity Regulatory Commission v. H. P. SEE^ the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down three basic principles with respect to the right of appeal, after referring to the judgment in the case of Garikapati Veeraya (supra) in paragraph - 22 which read as under:
"22. On a proper understanding of the authority in Garikapati Veeraya [Garikapati Veeraya v. iV. Subbiah Choudhry, AIR 1957 SC 540] which relied upon the Privy Council decision in Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd. [Colonial Sugar Reifning Co. Ltd. v. Irving, 1905 AC 369 : (1904-07) Ail ER Rep Ext 1620 (PC)], three basic principles, namely, 22.1. The forum of appeal available to a suitor in a pending action of an appeal to a superior tribunal which belongs to him as of right is a very different thing from regulating procedure;
22.2. That it is an integral part of the right when the action was initiated at the time of the institution of action; and 22.3. That if the court to which an appeal lies is altogether abolished without any forum constituted in its place for the disposal of pending matters or for lodgment of the appeals, vested right perishes; are established."
42. Para-22.3 in H. P. State Electricity Regulatory Commission (supra) makes it clear that one of the basic principles is that if the Court to ■ which an appeal lies is altogether abolished without any forum constitutedin its ® (2014) 5 see 219 / RNT, J & MRK, J 52 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch place for the disposal of pending matters or for lodgment of the appeals, vested right perishes.
43. Recently, in Charan Singh v. State of U.PJ, the Allahabad High Court reiterated the principles on right of appeal in Paragraphs 14 and 15 as under:
14. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge, who had made the reference, had not considered the provisions of Section 230(2)(d) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, in its right perspective, and therefore, while only considering the provision of Section 231 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 the reference was made. Had the court been shovra the provisions of Section 230(2)(d) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 then it would have become clear that such remedies as were available to the party which had filed any lis before the commencement of the new Act then all the remedies would have continued as were available to the litigant at the time of the filing of the Suit.
All remedies upon the filing of the Suit namely the filing of Appeals, Second Appeals, Revisions etc. are really but steps in a series of proceedings connected by an intrinsic unity and are to be treated to be as a one legal proceeding. The Right of Appeal is not a matter of procedure but is a substantive Right. The institution of a Suit carries with it the implication that all remedies in force at the time of the filing of the Suit were to be preserved to the parties till the rest ^ of the career of the Suit. The Appeal or a remedy to go to higher Court accrues to a litigant on the very date the lis commences and although it may be actually exercised when the adverse judgment is pronounced such right is to be governed by the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the Suit. In the instant case, since all remedies available at the time of the notification of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, had to continue, the remedy of Revision would also continue, even if it was not an inherent right which had accrued to the litigant as would be the case with an appeal.
"2024 SCCOnLineAll 7422 \ RNT, J & MRK. J 53 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
15. Any repealing law which repeals an earlier law shall not affect the remedies available to a party which were available to the party on the date when the suit was filed. It would continue to be in existence for the litigant just as it was available to him or her on the date of the filing the lis. A vested right to go to a higher Court can be taken away by a subsequent enactment if the latter expressly provides or a bare reading of it shows that the right of going to a higher Court as per the earlier law had been by a necessary intendment taken away.
44. The question therefore for our consideration is, in the present appeals, as to whether the Right of Appeal to the Special Court from the Order of the Special Tribunal under the Act 1982 has been taken away expressly or by necessary intendment. We make it clear that Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 providing the remedy of appeal to the Special Court has remained unchanged. There is no amendment to the Act 1982 taking away the Right of Appeal to the , Special Court. But, the Forum of the Special Court for appeal has been abolished. The question therefore Is whether such abolition of the Forum by necessary intendment, read in the light of Section 7 (4) of the Act 1982 which permits the State to abolish the Forum is to be considered as taking away the Right of Appeal under Section 7-A (3) of the Act 1982 by necessary intendment, though in the presence of Section 7A (3), the Right of Appeal cannot be said to have been taken away expressly.
45. The factual position in the present case is that, the appellate Forum has been abolished by issuing G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 by the State » Government. The said G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 has been issued in exercise of powers under Section 7 (4) of the Act 1982. In Section 7-A (3) of RNT, J & MRK, J 54 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batchi the Act 1982 conferring the Right of Appeal and creating the Forum of Special Court i.e., Appellate Court from the Orders of the Special Tribunal, there is no amendment.
In other words, that provision has not been repealed. Any alternative Forum therefore to pursue the Right of Appeal has not been created by the legislature. We emphasis by the legislature or by legislation. The question therefore is whether by G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 the appeals pending before the Special Court constituted under the Act 1982 on abolition of 4 the Special Court, without there being repeal of the provision for appeal and also without conferring any power on the State to create a new appellate forum, those appeals pending before the Special Court could, by the said G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 be transferred to the High Court to be decided as per the provisions of the Act 1982 i.e., exercising the appellate jurisdiction. The question is whether the Right of Appeal conferred by the statute and to be exercised before a particular Forum created under the Act of 1982, could be changed by the Government order and a new Appellate Forum (High Court) could be created, which is not provided by the Statute i.e.. Act of ' 1982.
46. The Forum is a matter pertaining to procedural law and therefore, the litigant has to pursue the legal proceedings at the Forum provided or created by the Act or in case of repeal the Forum provided by the repealing Act unless contrary intention appears. That principle applies to the pending proceedings as well. So, if by the repealing Act, the Forum has been abolished I \ RNT, J & MRK, J 55 LGA Nos.20of2{)16& batch and substituted by a new Forum, unless the contrary intention appears, the appeals pending before the abolished forum would be before the new Forum.
47. In other words, we may say that if the proceedings under the Act 1982 instituted before the Special Tribunal were pending on the date ' G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 was issued, the person aggrieved from the decision of the Tribunal would have still Right of Appeal which accrued on the date of the institution of the proceedings, but he cannot claim as of right to be- heard in appeal before particular Forum and he will have to approach the new Forum, unless a contrary intention is expressed.
48. But, here the complexity is that there is no repeal of the statute nor of the provision, providing for appeal to a particular Forum i.e., the Special Court under the Act 1982. The abolition of the Special Court for appeals is by the G.O.Hs.No.420, dated 02.09.2016, which provides for transfer of the- pending appeals to the High Court and such provision in our view is in conflict with Section 7A (3) of the Act 1982, which provides that appeals would be before the Special Court. The constitution of the Special Court itself has been provided under Section 7 (1) of the Act 1982. The High Court is not the Special Court under the Act 1982 under Section 7 read with Section 2 (ia).
49. The abolition of the forum by G.O.Ms.No.420 dated 02.09.2016 is within the powers conferred by Section 7-A of the Act 1982. So, vested right to appeal either in the pending appeals before Special Court at the time of abolition, or for the proceedings pending in the Special Tribunal at the first instance on the date of abolition, in our view had perished on abolition of forum / RNT, .1 & MRK, J 56 LGA Nos.20of20l6& batch of appeal vide G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016. It is true that by the same G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09,2016, the pending appeals were provided to be decided by the High Court exercising the powers under the Act 1982, but that part of the G.O.Ms.l\lo.420, in our view, is beyond the power of the State Government under Section 7-A of the Act 1982 and also contrary to the ■provision of Section 7-A of the Act 1982. On abolition, the Special Court might have come to an end, but in the absence of any legislation by the Legislature, creating a new Forum, the pending appeals could not be either transferred to the High Court to be decided under the Act 1982 nor the High Court could be the appellate forum for the appeals under the Act 1982. It could be so made, only by the Legislature, which has not been done.
50. We are not saying that in place of the Special Court under the Act 1982, the High Court cannot be made the Appellate Court under the Act 1982, but what we are saying is that, that can be done only by the amendment in the ■Act 1982, as the appeal and the appellate Forum are the creation of the statutes. The High Court not being the Special Court under the Act 1982, and the High Court not having been conferred the appellate power under the Act 1982, and the Order of the Special Tribunal being of the Special Tribunal under the Act 1982 and not by the regular Civil Courts, under the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court cannot be the appellate Court for the orders passed under the Act 1982.
\
51. The provision made by the Government under the G.O.Ms.No,420, dated 02.09.2016, changing the Forum, in the manner it has been done, is, in RNT, J & MRK, J 57 LGA Nos.20 of2016 & batch our view, unknown to law. Any such power was also not given to the Government under Section 7-A of the Act 1982 by the Legislature/Parliament to substitute the appellate Forum created by the Act 1982 itself. The only power given by the Act 1982 was to constitute, reconstitute or abolish the Special Court. On abolition of the Special Court what could be constituted or reconstituted was only the Special Court as per Section 7 read with Section 2 (la) of the Act, but not an entirely different forum, different from the statutory Forum of which the constitution was also provided by the Act, as to who shall be the Chairman & Members etc. We are of the considered view that the High Court could not be made an appellate Court under the Act 1982, may be for the appeals pending before the abolished Special Courts, by issuing a Government Order, beyond the scope of powers given by Section 7-A of the Act 1982.
v) Notification contrary to or in excess of power given bv. Statute:
52. The case in Collector of Central Excise v. Parle Exports (P). Ltd.^ vjas cited by the learned standing counsel for the High Court to contend that while interpreting an exemption clause, liberal interpretation should be imparted to the language thereof and the notification must be read as a whole in the context of other relevant provisions. When a notification is issued in accordance with the power conferred by the statute, it has statutory force and validity and therefore, the exemption under the notification is as if it were contained in the Act itself.
(1989) 1 see 345 RNT, J & MRK, J 58 LG A Nos.20of20l6& batch.
53. In the aforesaid case, the notification was issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules. It was observed that the notification should be read along with the Act. It was also obsen/ed that the principle is well settled that when two views of a notification are possible, it should be construed in favour of the subject as notification is part of fiscal enactment, Para-17, on which reliance was placed, reads as under:
17. How then should the courts proceed? The expressions in the Schedule and in the notification for exemption should be understood by the language employed therein bearing in mind the context in which the expressions occur.
The words used in the provision, imposing taxes or granting exemption should be understood in the same way in which these are understood in ordinary parlance in the area in which the law is in force or by the people who ordinarily deal with them. It is, however, necessary to bear in mind certain principles. The notification in this case was issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules and should be read along with the Act. The notification must be read as a whole m the context of the other relevant provisions. When a notification is issued in accordance with power conferred by the statute, it has statutory force and validity and, therefore, the exemption under the notification is as if it were contained in the Act itself. See in this connection the observations of this Court in Orient Weaving Mills (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [AIR 1963 SC 98 ; 1962 Supp 3 SCR 481] . See ?l\so Kailash Nath v. State cfU.P. [AIR 1957 SC 790 :
(1957) 8 SfC 358] The principle is well settled that when two views of a notification are possible, it should be construed in favour of the subject as notification is part of a fiscal enactment. But in this connection, it is well to rememoer the observations of the Judicial Committee in Coroline .M Armytagev. Frederick Wilkinson [{1^1?,) 3 AC 355, 370] that it is only, however, in the event of there being a real difficulty in ascertaining the meaning of a particular enactment that the question of strictness or of liberality of construction arises. The Judicial Committee reiterated in the said decision at p. 369 of the report that in a taxing Act provisions \ ■ \ RNT, J & MRK, J 59 LGA Nos.20of20l6& batch. establishing (sic enacting) an exception to the general rule of taxation are to be construed strictly against those who invoke its benefit. While interpreting an exemption clause, liberal interpretation should be imparted to the language thereof, provided no violence is done to the language employed. It must, however, be borne in mind that absurd results of construction should be avoided."
54. There is no dispute on the principles of law that in taxing statute ' while interpreting an exemption clause, liberal interpretation should be imparted. There can also be no dispute that when a Notification is issued in accordance with the power conferred by the statute, it has statutory force and- validity. There would also be no dispute that the Notification should be read along with the Act. But at the same time, the settled principle is, which is also reflected from Parle Exports that while interpreting the Notification no violence is to be done to the language employed by the statute. The Notification no doubt has a statutory force and validity, but when the Notification is issued in accordance with the power conferred by the statute. If • there is no power conferred by the statute or the notification issued in purported exercise of the power is in fact beyond the power conferred by the statute, to accord statutory force and validity to such notification would not be the intendment of the legislature. Such notifications cannot be held to have the statutory force or/and validity to the extent of being beyond the scope of the power conferred by the statute.
55. In the present case, as observed, in the earlier part of this judgment, the Act 1982 did not confer any power on the State to issue notification for / RNT, J & MRK, J ' 60 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch '^1 creation of a new Forum for the appeals under the Act 1982. Though the State had the power in terms of Section 7A to re-constitute and also to abolish the Special Court, but other than the Special Court, it has no power to create a distinct Forum and making the same as the Appellate Authority under the Act 1982.
The Special Court is defined under the Act, so, constitution or re constitution by the notification should only be in terms of that Section. Any different constitution even of the Special Court, contrary to the provisions of the Act could not be, by issuing notification by the State.
56. So, we are of the considered view that the judgment cited by the learned standing counsel for the High Court in Parle Exports (P) Ltd. (supra) does not support his contention that the notification should be construed liberally to provide the appellate forum and as the notification provides for the appellate forum on abolition of the forum created by the statute to provide the remedy of appeal in that new forum, the notification would have the statutory force and validity. We reject such contention being without substance.
57. In JayantilalAmratlal Shodhan v. F. N. RanaP on which, learned standing counsel for the High Court placed reliance, in particular paragraph-16 thereof, to contend that the notification will have a statuton/ force, the Hon'ble Apex Court held in Para-16 which reads as under:
"16. In this background we may consider the effect of the Presidential notification. It cannot be and has not been denied that it was open to the Legislature by making an express provision in the Act to entrust the I'unctions of the Central Government that is to confer powers and impose \ ® AIR 1964 SC 648 RNT, J & MRK, J 61 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch duties under Article 258(2) in relation to matters under Sections 4, 5 A, 7, 9 and 11 and related sections to Commissioners of Divisions in the State. Such entrustment of power would not be open to challenge on the ground that it was unauthorised. If entrusted by enactment, it would have the force of law. It was open to the Parliament by appropriate legislation incorporated in the Land Acquisition Act or otherwise to provide that the power to issue notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, and to appoint the Collector, be exercised by an officer to be named by the appropriate Government. Issue of a notification by the appropriate Government designating the officer to exercise the powers would unquestionably have the force of law, within the meaning of Section 2{d). Instead of making detailed provisions and eataloguing the entrustment of functions in the different statutes which may be entrusted to the authorities of the State by the exercise of legislative power, the Constitution has invested the President with authority to entrust the functions to the Government of the State or their officers. The effect of Article 258(1) is merely to make a blanket provision enabling the President by notification to exercise the power which the Legislature could exercise by legislation, to entrust functions to the officers to be specified in that behalf by the President and subjeet to the conditions prescribed thereby. By the entrustment of powers under the statute, the notification merely authorises the State or an officer of the State in the circumstances and within the limits prescribed to exercise the specified functions. Effect of the Presidential notification is that, wherever the expression "appropriate Government" occurs in the Act in relation to provisions for acquisition of land for the purposes of the Union, the words appropriate Government or the Commissioner of the Division having territorial jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situate", were deemed to be'substituted. In other words, by the issue of the Presidential notificatidri, the Land Acquisition Act must be deemed pro tanto amended. It would be difficult to regard such an amendment as not having the force of law."
/ RNT, J & MRK, .1 62 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch
58. In JayantHa/ Amratlal Shodhan (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down the principle of law thaj; it is open for the legislature by making an express provision in the Act to entrust the functions of the Central Government that is to confer powers and enforce duties under Article 258 (2) of Constitution of India in relation to the specified matters and such entrustment of power would not be open to challenge on the ground that it was unauthorised, and if entrusted by the enactment, it would have the force of law. There cannot be any dispute so far as the principle of law is concerned that if a statute confers the power on the State, then such entrustment of power could not be challenged.
59. But, Section 7-A confers the power on the State Government to do act as specified therein by issuing Notification. That entrustment of power is not an issue here. The notification issued by the Government of G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 under Section 7, no doubt, shall have the force of law, but to the extent of entrustment of power and duties by the said provision and not beyond that.
60. In Subhash Ramkumar Bind Alias Vakii v. State of Maharashtra^^ the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that Notification in common English acceptation means and implies a formal announcement of a legally relevant fact and in the event of a statute speaking of a notification being published in the Official Gazette, the same cannot but mean a notification published by the authority of law in the Official Gazette. It is on formal 10 (2003) 1 see 506 RNT, J & MRK, J 63 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch declaration and publication of an order and shall have to be in accordance with the declared policies or in the event the requirement of the statute then in that. event in accordance therewith. Relevant part of para-20 of Subhash Ramkumar Bind Alias k&A//(supra) reads as under:
•20 We find, however, that there is some justification in such a contention but the second count is rather important inasmuch as the requirement of the statute is the issuance of a notification. Notification in common English acceptation means and implies a formal announcement of a legally relevant fact and in the event of a statute speaking of a notification being published in the Official Gazette, the same cannot but mean a notification published by the authority of law in the Official Gazette. It is on formal declaration and publication of an order and shall have to be in accordance with the declared policies or in the event the requirement of the statute then in that evMit in accordance therewith."
61. In Subhash Ramkumar Bind Alias l^aAr/7 (supra) the Hontile Apex Court further observed and held that the question of there being any notification even in the guise of an administrative order does not and cannot arise. The requirement of the statute is sacrosanct. We lay emphasis that the requirement of the statute is sacrosanct. So, even if a notification is there, what is of utmost importance is that, if that notification fulfils the requirement of the statute. Any notification in contravention of the statutory provisions would have no validity. A notification issued in exercise of the power conferred, can also not be permitted to override the statutory provisions.
/ RNT, J & MRK, J 64 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch n
62. In State of Madhya Pradesh v. G. S. Dali and Flour MiUs^^ the Hon'ble Apex Court held that executive instructions can supplement a Statute or cover areas to which the Statute does not extend, But they cannot run contrary to the statutory provisions or whittle down their effect.
63. In Jaiveer Singh v. The State of Uttarakhand^^ the Hon'ble Apex Court recently held that it is a trite law that the Government cannot amend or supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions. It can, if the rules are silent on any particular point, fill up the gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed. It was further held that an authority cannot issue orders/ofFice memorandum/executive instructions in contravention of the statutory rules,
vi) Resolution of the Administrative Committee:
64. We would now also advert to the resolution of the Administrative Committee of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Teiangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, dated 20.10.2016, as already mentioned in earlier part of this judgment.
65. In TeJ Prakash Pathak v. Rajastan High Court^^ the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated that where the statutory rules are silent, they can be supplemented in a .manner consistent with the object and spirit of the Rules by an administrative order.
There, the administrative order was by the ■ administrative committee of the High Court.
11 1992 Supp(l) see 150 12 V 2023 see OnLine Se 1584 (2025) 2 see ! RNT, J & MRK, J 65 LG A Nos.20of2(>16& batch 66. In Tej Prakash Pathak the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to
a three-Judge Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Apex court in Sivanandan C.T V. High Court of Kerala^"* Saiam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court o.f Manipur^^. In Saiam Samarjeet Singh (supra) the decision of the Full Court to depart from the expected exercise of preparing the merit list as per the unamended rules was held clearly violative of the substantive legitimate expectation of the candidate. The Hon'ble Apex court observed and held that where there are no rules or rules are silent on the subject, administrative instructions may be issued to supplement and fill in gaps in the rules. In that. event administrative instructions would govern the field provided they are not ultra vires the provisions of the rules or the statute or the Constitution. But where the rules expressly or impliedly cover the field, the recruiting body would have to abide by the rules.
67. Paragraphs - 60 to 62 of Tej Prakash Pathak (supra) reads as under:
"(E) Procedure prescribed in the extant rule not to be violated
60. In Sivanandan C.T. [Sivanandan C.T. v. High Court ofKerala, (2024) 3 see 799 : (2024) 1 See (L&S) 67 : 2023 INSe 709] the issue before the eonstitution Bench was whether for selection minimum marks could be prescribed contrary to the extant rules and the advertisement. Answering in the negative, the eonstitution Bench, speaking through one of us (Dr D.Y. ehandrachud, e.J.), held : (See pp. 811-12, paras 15-16)
15. ... The Administrative eommittee of the High eourt decided to impose a cut-off for the viva voce examination actuated by the bona fide reason of (2024) 3 see 799 (2024) 14 see 179 RNT, J & MRK, J 66 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch ensuring that candidates with requisite personality assume judicial office.
However laudable that approach of the Administrative Committee may have been, such a change would be required to be brought in by a substantive amendment to the rules which came in much later as noticed above. This is not a case where the rules or the scheme of the High Court were silent. Where the statutory rules are silent, they can be supplemented in a manner consistent with the object and spirit of the Rules by an administrative order.
16. In the present case, the statutory rules expressly provided that the select list would be drawn up on the basis of the aggregate of marks obtained in the written examination and the viva voce. This was further elaborated in the scheme of examination which prescribed that there would be no cut-off marks for the viva voce. This position is also reflected in the Notification of the High Court dated 30-9-2015. In this backdrop, we have come to the conclusion that the decision of the High Court suffered from its being ultra vires the 1961 Rules besides being manifestly arbitrary.''
61. YoWoWmgSivanandan C.T. [Sivanandan C.T. v. High Court of Kerala, (2024) 3 see 799 : (2024) 1 SCC (L&S) 67 : 2023 INSC 709] , a three-Judge Bench of this Court in Salam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court of Manipur \Salam Samarjeet Singh High Court of Manipur, (2024) 14 SCC 179 ; 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2316 : 2024 INSC 647] held : {Salam Samarjeet Singh case {Salam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court of Manipur, (2024) 14 SCC 179 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2316; 2024 INSC 647], SCC para 34) "3^. ... Prescribing minimum marks for viva voce segment may be justified for the holistic assessment of a candidate, but in the present case such a requirement was introduced only after commencement of the recruitment process and in violation of the statutory rules. The decision of the Full Court to depart from the expected exercise of preparing the merit list as per the unamended rules is clearly violative of the substantive legitimate expectation of the petitioner. It also fails the tests of fairness, consistency and predictability and hence is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India." \ RNT, J & MRK, J 67 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
62. There can therefore be no doubt that where there are no rules or the rules are silent on the subject, administrative instructions may be issued to supplement and fill in the gaps in the rules. In that event administrative instructions would govern the field provided they are not ultra vires the provisions of the rules or the statute or the Constitution. But where the rules expressly or impliedly cover the field, the recruiting body would have to abide by the rules."
68. In High Court of Judicature at Madras v. Thirumaiai^^, the Madras High Court held that an administrative order passed by the High Court is subject to judicial scrutiny and not vice-versa.
69. In R. Ranjith Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu^^ Hon'ble Apex Court observed and held as under in paragraphs-20 & 21:
"20. This Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. G.S. Dali and Flour Mills, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 150 has held that executive instructions can supplement a Statute or cover areas which the Statute does not extend. They cannot run contrary to the statutory provisions or whittle down their effect. In the present case, the G.O. dated 13.07.1995, G.O. dated 24.10.1996 and G.O. dated 10.06.2009 are executive instructions and based upon the executive instructions, the statutory provisions as contained under the statutory rules could not have been made applicable as has been done in the present case.
21. This Court in the case of Jaiveer Singh v. The State of Uttarakhand, 2023 INSC 1024 has held as under:
''34. It can thus be seen that it is a trite law that the Government cannot amend or supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions, but if the rules are silent on any particular point, it can fill up the gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed.
It is a settled proposition of law that an authority cannot issue orders/office memorandum/executive instructions in contravention of the statutory rules.16
/ 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 1808 17 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1009 RNT, J & MRK, J 68 LG A Nos.20 of 2016 & batch • However, instructions can be issued only to supplement the statutory rules but not to supplant it.
This Court has again held in the aforesaid case that the Government cannot issue executive instructions in contravention of the statutory rules."
vii) Separation of powers:
70. In Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab^^ the Hon'bie Apex •Court held that ordinarily the executive power connotes the residue of governmental functions that remain after legislative and judicial functions are taken away. The functions of the different parts or branches of the Government have been sufficiently differentiated and consequently it can very well be said that our Constitution does not contemplate assumption by one organ or part of the State, of functions that essentially belong to another. The executive indeed can exercise the powers of departmental or subordinate legislation when such powers are delegated to it by the legislature. It can also when so empowered, exercise judicial functions in a limited way. The executive Government can never go against the provisions of the Constitution or of any law. Paragraph - 14 of Ram Jawaya ATa/yr/r (supra) reads as under:
"14. It may not be possible to frame an exhaustive definition of what executive function means and implies. Ordinarily the executive power connotes the residue of governmental functions that remain after legislative and judicial functions are taken away. The Indian Constitution has not indeed recognised the doctrine of separation of powers in its absolute rigidity but the functions of the different parts or branches of the Government have been sufficiently differentiated and consequently it can very well be said that our Constitution does not contemplate assumption, by one organ or part of the State, of 18 (1955) 1 see 553 RNT, J & MRK, J 69 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch functions that essentially belong to another. The executive indeed can exercise the powers of departmental or subordinate legislation when such powers are delegated to it by the legislature. It can also, when so empowered, exercise judicial functions in a limited way. The executive Government, however, can never go against the provisions of the Constitution or of any law. This is clear from the provisions of Article 154 of the Constitution but, as we have already stated, it does not follow from this that in order to enable the executive to function there must be a law already in existence and that the powers of the executive are limited merely to the earrying out of these laws."
71. In the present case, we are of the view that the executive has certainly transgressed these powers in providing that the Appeals pending before the Special Court under the Act 1982 on the abolition of the Special Court by G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016, would be transferred to the High Court which the High Court will decide under the Act 1982.
72. Similarly, we are of the view that the executive power exercised by the High Court in passing the resolution to the same effect and thus giving effect to the Government Order for the said purpose has also transgressed its power on administrative side by conferring to it the appellate powers making it an Appellate Court, under the Act 1982 which were not conferred on the High Court by the Statute i.e.. Act of 1982, but were conferred on the Special Court under the said Act.
viiil Devolutidn:
73. Sri S. Vivek Chandrasekhar, learned standing counsel for the High Court, submitted that by the devolution, the right of appeal on the abolition of the Special Court, would be with the High Court, We are of the view that any / RNT, J & MRK, .1 70 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch such doctrine of devolution cannot be attracted or pressed. The expression 'devolution', is defined in Oxford Dictionary Edition as follows:
The act of giving power from a central authority or government to an authority or a government in a local region".
74. The devolution in its ordinary sense threfore entails the transfer of power from Central Authority to a lower tier of government. It may be referred as the "de-concentration of power". On abolition of the Special Court created under the Act 1982, how the appellate powers conferred on a Special Court constituted under the Act 1982, would devolve upon the High Court by applying the said principle of 'devolution' could not be addressed or explained by the learned standing counsel.
75. In Dhurandhar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash Universit/^ the devolution has been dealt with but in the context of a civil suit, where during pendency of the suit, the plaintiff dies and so with the leave of the Court, the matter can be pursued by the person upon whom the interests of the deceased devolves, in the context of the Order 22 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure. We do not find the applicability of such principle of 'devolution' in the case of the present nature.
76. We are not in agreement with any such submission advanced by the learned standing counsel for the High Court, which is rejected having no substance, i ' \ . (2001) 6 SO RNT, J & MRK, J 71 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch
ix) Successive Forum:
77. The learned standing counsel for the High Court further submitted that because the Special Court is subordinate to the High Court and therefore, on the abolition of the Special Court, tbe High Court being superior Court, by applying the doctrine of 'successive forum' the High Court would be the appellate Court. Successive Forum may succeed to the forum abolished, but for . that the successive forum has to be created by the competent authority and legislation. In the present case, the High Court has not been made the successive forum or the appellate Court under the Act 1982 on abolition of the Special Court, by any legislation/statute. Consequently, we do not find force in the submission based on the alleged doctrine of'successive forum'.
x) Consideration of the authorities cited bv the appellants 'counsel
78. In State of A.P. v. P.V.Hanumantha Rao (Dead) through 20 LRs. upon which learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance, the Hon'ble Apex Court on examination of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh' Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 and in the light of its objects and reasons observed that in cases of alleged land grabbing, exclusive jurisdiction is conferred on Special Court. Jurisdiction of a civil Court on such subject matter stands ousted. The Special Court has been conferred powers of a civil court to examine all questions of title and possession with respect to the land alleged to have been grabbed. The findings of the Special Court are binding and conclusive on the parties and all others having interest in the land which is 20 (2003) 10 see 121 RNT, J & MRK, J 72 LG A Nos.20of20l6& batch alleged to have been grabbed. Against the decision of the Special Court , no appeal is provided. The only remedy of the aggrieved party is to approach the High Court under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India.
79. That matter in P. V. Hanumantha Rao (Dead) through LRs. (supra) had arisen out of the order passed by the Special Court before the learned Single Judge and from the order in the writ petition the matter was taken to the Hon'ble Apex Court. The question was with respect to the scope of interference by the High Court in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction in the order of the Special Court. It was held that the remedy of the writ petition was not against the decision of the subordinate court, tribunal or authority but it was against the decision making process. In the decision-making process, if the court, tribunal or authority deciding the case, had ignored vital evidence and thereby arrived at erroneous conclusion or had misconstrued the provisions of the relevant Act or misunderstood the scope of its jurisdiction, the constitutional power of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 could be invoked to set right such errors and prevent gross injustice to the party complaining. The Hon'ble Apex Court referred to its decision in Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander RaF to reiterate that in the exercise of power under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution, the High Court had the right to interfere (1) where there was an error manifest and apparent on the face of the proceedings, such as when it was based on clear misreading or utter disregard of the provisions of law, and (2) a grave injustice or gross failure of justice had occasioned thereby. In the \ (2003) 6 see 675 \ RNTJ&MRK, J 73 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 or in exercise of the power under Articie 226 of the Constitution, the High Court would not convert itself into a court of appeal and indulge in re-appreciation or evaluation of evidence.
80. From the aforesaid judgment, it is evident that when the Order of the Special Court was final under the Act: 1982, the remedy would be to fite writ petition or petition under Article 227 of the Constitution to the High Court.
81. Consequently, if the Order of the Special Tribunal under the Act- 1982, which exercises original jurisdiction, if the remedy of appeal has been taken away, as the Forum of Appeal has been abolished, i.e., the Special Court, and so, the Order of the Special Tribunal becomes final under the Act 1982 or even with respect to the appeals pending before the Special Court against the Order of the Special Tribunal, on abolition of the Special Court, the Order of the Special Tribunal would be open to challenge in a writ petition under Article 226 or may be under Article 227 of the Constitution in the exercise of supervisory powers to this Court.
82. The scope of interference with such order by this Court may be different i.e., within the scope and on the parameters as laid down in various judgments, including as referred to above, but on that count, i.e., the abolition of the Appellate Forum or a Special Court, we are of the view that, that would not make this Court an Appellate Court like the Special Court or the Appellate Court like under Section 96 or 106 CPC from the decree or order of the regular Courts passed in the exercise of original civil jurisdiction. Neither it can be said , \ that the appeal would lie to this Court nor that this Court would become \ / RNT, J & MRK, J 74 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch appellate authority/court under the Act of 1982 nor that the appellate powers as under the Act 1982 vested with the Special Court or by virtue of any other provision conferring the appellate powers, would be available for interference in the Order of the Special Tribunal.
83. The aforesaid authority in P. V. Hanumantharao (Dead) through LRs (supra) is of no help to the appellants for the contention that the appeal would lie to this Court against the Order of the Special Tribunal or the appeals pending against the Order of the Tribunal before the Special Court, could be transferred to this Court, to be decided as an appellate Court under the Act 1982.
84. In V. Visalakshi v. Special Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act^ Hyderabacf^ upon which also learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance, a Coordinate Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh on consideration of the provisions of the Act 1982, as also the authority in P. V. Hanumantha Rao (Dead) through LRsisu^xd), observed with respect to the scope of the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution, and finding that, on the analysis of the material available, which material was categorically and properly examined by the Special Court, refused to interfere with the Order of the Special Court in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction. That was a matter, where the Order of the Special Court was challenged before the High Court in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India. The question of maintainability of appeal 2012 see OnLine AP 573 RNT, J & MRK, J 75 LGA Nos.20 of 2016 & batch before the High Court, as Special Court or on abolition of the Special Court, under the Act 1982 was not an issue for consideration nor was decided.
85. In PatU ChandramouUswar Reddy (supra) on which the appellants' counsels placed reliance, is not relevant to the controversy involved herein. There, the points for determination were with respect to the jurisdiction of the Special Tribunal and the sustainability of the order passed by the Special Tribunal in the facts and in law as in that case. Simply an observation was made in paragraph - 9.4 that, the Special Court constituted in terms of Section 7 of the Act, as is defined in Section 2 (i) (ia) of the Act, is a Forum, which has jurisdiction over the then State of Andhra Pradesh, which is now abolished. That is a fact, on which there is no dispute that the Special Court has been abolished. But, this judgment is not on the point whether the High Court would become the appellate Court under the Act 1982, on abolition of the Special Court by G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016.
IV Conclusions:
86. We are of the view that for tfie consideration made above and the settled legal position as discossed in this judgment, notwithstanding the G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 and the Administrative Resolution of the Committee of the then Common High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Subject Item No.4, dated 20.10.2016, the Land Grabbing Appeals would not be maintainable before this Court. The High Court is not the Appellate Court for the purpose of the appeals under the Act 1982.
\ RNT, J & MRK, J 76 LGA Nos.20of20l6& batch
87. However, the powers of this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are available. An Order even if made final under the Statute either by not providing the appeal or subsequently taking away that appeal right, may be retrospectively, expressly or by necessary intendment, as in the present case by abolition of the appellate Forum under the Act 1982, shall be open to judicial review and a party, if aggrieved from the Order of the Special Tribunal, will have the right, being aggrieved person, to approach this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. .
88. In Nawab Shaqafath AU Khan (supra), it was held that the High Court has the jurisdiction in appropriate cases to convert a revision application or writ petition into an appeal or vice versa in exercise of its inherent power. but subject to the fulfillment of other conditions. In the said judgment, it was further held that for the said purpose, an appropriate case for exercise of such jurisdiction must be made out. We are of the view that there is no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and the writ petition requires fulfillment of procedural requirements. We therefore do not find the present cases appropriate for conversion into writ petitions.
89. We may sum up by holding that;
(i) Right to Appeal is a statutory right. Right to Appellate Forum is only procedural;
(ii) Right to Appeal vests ori the date the Us is commenced. It can be taken away by a subsequent enactment, if the latter expressly RNT, J & MRK, J 77 LG A Nos.20of2016& batch provides or even by a necessary intendment of the reading of the subsequent enactment;
(iii) If the Court to which an appeal lies is abolished without any Forum constituted in its place for the disposal of pending matters 4 or for filing of the appeals, the vested right to appeal perishes;
(iv) Section 7 of the Act 1982 confers the right of appeal from the Order of the Special Tribunal before the Special Court. Constitution of the Special Court is prescribed by the Act itself under Section 2 (la) read with Section 7. The High Court is not the Special Court under the Act 1982. The High Court is not the Appellate Court under the Act 1982;
(v) Section 7 (4) of the Act 1982 confers the power on the State Government by notification to re-constitute the Special Court or may at any time abolish such Special Court. The power given to the State Government by the Statute is to constitute, re-constitute or abolish the Special Court. The Statute does not confer any power on the State Government to create a new appellate Court for the purposes of the Act 1982, other than the constitution, re- constitution of the Special Court which is defined under the Act;
(vi) The State Government has no power to provide for an Appellate Forum/Court, different from the Appellate Forum, i.e., the Special Court as provided by the Act 1982;
\ RNT, J & MRK, J 78 LGA Nos.20 of20l6 & batch
(vii) The G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 to the extent of abolition of the Special Court by notification is within the powers of the State Government, but to the extent the said G.O.Ms.No.420 provided for the High Court as the Appellate Court to which the Appeals under the Act 1982 will be transferred and decided as the Appellate Court under the Act 1982, is beyond the statutory powers conferred on the State Government and to that extent, the Government Order is in transgression of the executive powers of the State and in excess of the power conferred by the Act 1982;
(viii) The Resolution No.4, dated 20.10.2016 of the Administrative Committee of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, directing for transfer of the pending appeals before the Special Court under the Act at the time of its abolition to the High Court to be decided pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.420, dated 02.09.2016 would also not confer the appellate powers on the High Court nor make it an Appellate Court under the Act 1982, as the right to appeal and the appellate Forum are creation of the Statute. By the said resolution, the power could not be conferred on itself, contrary to the statutory provisions;
(ix) There is no repeal of Section 7A of the Act 1982, which provides that the appeal under the said Act from the Order of the Special I RNT, J & MRK, J 79 LGA Nos.20of2016& batch Tribunal shall lie to the Special Court. There is only abolition of the Special Court by the Government Order/Notific^tion; (X) Any Notification can only supplement but not supplant the statutory provisions. The notification in the present c^se has the effect of supplanting the legal provisions of the statute of the Act 1982 to the extent of creation of the appellate Forum, other than the one provided by the Act 1982;
(xi) The doctrine of 'devolution' and 'successive forum', as argued by the learned standing counsel are not attracted. Thereby it cannot be said that on abolition of the Special Court, the High Court would become the appellate Court for the purposes of the appeals under the Act 1982;
(xii) The Land Grabbing Appeals are not maintainable and the High Court is not the Appellate Court for the appeals under the Act 1982.
(xiii) The Orders of the Special Tribunal under the Act 1982 are therefore final under the Act 1982, but they shall be open for judicial review by the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India; V Result:
90. In the result, it is held that all the aforesaid Appeals are not- maintainable in this Court. The right of appeal of the appellants against the orders of the Special Tribunal under the Act 1982, against which the appeals RNT, J & MRIC, J 80 LGA Nos.20of2016&bati have been filed before this Court directly or the appeals filed before the then Special Court and transferred to this Court to decide as Appellate Court under the Act 1982 are not maintainable, The aforesaid Appeals are therefore dismissed as not maintainable.
91. As the Appeals were pending since long and we find those not to be maintainable, while dismissing the appeals as not maintainable, to secure the interest of the parties, we provide that in case the appellants seek to prefer writ petitions, they can do so, within a reasonable period, say a period of 3 (three) months from the date of this judgment. For a period of 3 (three) months, the interim orders, if granted earlier in the Appeal(s), in those appeals such interim order shall continue to operate.
92. We make it clear that we have considered and decided only the maintainability of the appeals and not considered the merits of the impugned orders either way.
93. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.
Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO //TRUE COPY// JOINT R^STRAR SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the Hon'ble Sri Justice RAVI NATH TILHARI (For his Lordships' Kind Perusal) One Fair Copy to the Hon'ble Sri Justice MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM (For his Lordships' Kind Perusal) To,
1. The A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Tribunal (District Judge) Guntur, Guntur District, (with records)
2. The Special Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (prohibition) Act cum- Principal District Judge. Nellore, SPSR Nellore District, (with records)
3. The Special Tribunal District Court. Machilipatnam. Krishna District, (with records)
4. The Chairman, Tribunal under the land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 1982- cum- District Judge, at Anantapur. Anantapur District, (with records)
5. The District Judge-cum-Dpecial Tribunal, Cuddapah, YSR Kadapa District, (with records)
6. The Special Tribonal-cum-District Judge. Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District, (with records)
7. the Special Court under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act cum The Principal District Judge. Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam District, (with records)
8. The Principal District Judge: Eluru, West Godavari District, (with records)
9. The Principal District Judge, Ongole, Praksam District, (with records)
10. One CC to Sri K Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC]
11. One CC to Sri Vivek Chandra Sekhar S, Advocate [OPUC]
12. One CC to Smt. A Varalakshmi, Advocate [QPUC]
13. One GC to Sri Sri CH Laxmi Narayana. Advocate [OPUC]
14. One CC to Sri CH Nagendramu, Advocate [OPUC]
15. One CC to Sri P Nagendra Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
16. One CC to Ms. Ayesha Azma S Advocate [OPUC]
17. One CC to Sri Unnam Sravan Kumar Advocate [OPUC]
18. One CC to Sri Manohar Kalangi, Advocate [OPUC]
19. One CC to Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin, Advocate [OPUC]
20. One CC to Sri A S C Bose, Advocate [OPUC]
21. One CC to Sri Syed Shareef Ahmed, Advocate [OPUC]
22. One CC to Sri M N Narasimha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
23. One CC to Sri Yallabandi Ramatirtha, Advocate [OPUC]
24. One CC to Sri Rama Mohan Palanki, Advocate [OPUC]
25. One CC to Sri V V L N Sarma, Advocate [OPUC]
26. One CC to Sri T N M Ranga Rao, Advocate [OPUC]
27. One CC to Sri P Ganga Rami Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
28. One CC to Sri K V Rajendra Prasad, Advocate [OPUC]
29. One CC to Sri V V Satish, Advocate [OPUC]
30. One CC to Sri K Sairam Murthy, Advocate [OPUC]
31. One CC to Sri Venkata Subbaiah Pogula, Advocate [OPUC]
32. One CC to Sri A Chandraiah, Advocate [OPUC]
33. One CC to Sri K Sarva Bhouma Rao, Advocate [OPUC]
34. One CC to Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, Advocate [OPUC]
35. One CC to Sri Dammalapati Srinivas, Advocate General for the State of A.P. Advocate [OPUC]
36. One CC to Sri Vivek Chandra Sekhar Standing Counsel for A.P High Court Advocate [OPUC]
37. One CC to Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati Advocate [OPUC
38. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.
39. Nine (09) L.R. Copies.
40.The Under Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi.
41.The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh High Court Advocates' Association Library, High Court Buildings, Amaravathi.
42. Two CD Copies SAM vna . f' HIGH COURT DATED:28/08/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT L.G.A. Nos. 20, 19, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31 OF 2016, AND 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32 OF 2017, AND 1 & 2 OF 2024 ^ U SEP 2025 O. . Curreni Section f DISMISSING THESE LAND GRABBING APPEALS AS NOT MAINTAINABLE