Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Osuri Ravindra Nath, E.G. Dist. vs Gram Panchayat, E.G. Dist. on 13 July, 2022
Author: C. Praveen Kumar
Bench: C. Praveen Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No. 18919 of 2009
ORDER:
1. As seen from the docket proceedings, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner on 28.06.2022 and, as such, it was directed to be listed on 12.07.2022. Even on 12.07.2022, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner and the matter was directed to be listed under the caption "for Dismissal". Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner.
2. The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in denying the permission and approval of plans for construction of house in Survey No. 154, situated at Atchuthapuram, Kakinada Rural Mandal, as illegal, improper and incorrect.
3. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would show that the Petitioner is said to be the owner of the property, but the authorities have rejected the same on the ground that Gram Panchayat intimated to M.R.O., vide Proceedings, dated 03.02.2005, to the effect that house-site pattas were granted to landless poor persons in respect of the said land and a resolution to that effect was passed by the Gram Panchayat on 18.12.2004. Though, the Petitioner claims to have approached the Gram Panchayat seeking information about the same, but the authorities failed to furnish the information. However, the Petitioner came to 2 know that one Smt. Kalavala Ratna Kumar, W/o. Jacob, applied for grant of patta in respect of the said land.
4. A counter came to be filed by the Secretary, Gram Panchayat, stating that the Petitioner has no right or title over the property. The averments in the counter show that a Sale Deed has been executed in favor of Thute Subbayamma, W/o. Venkataratnam on 09.06.1971 in respect of the property, which is a subject matter of dispute in this Writ Petition as well. Hence pleaded that the Gram Panchayat was right in rejecting the request of the Petitioner. It would be appropriate to extract paragraph no. 5 of the counter, which is as under:
"5. The Petitioner suppressed the real facts and got filed the Writ Petition before the Honourable High Court of Judicature. All the above facts revealed by the documents filed by the Petitioner itself, which are filed with the application for approved Plan submitted before the Gram Panchayat. The intention of Gram Panchayat, S.Atchutapuram in the letter dated 18.03.2009 is that the Petitioner is the original owner of the entire property including the disputed property till 1971 and the Petitioner lost his right as and when the Petitioner and his family members executed a Sale Deed in favor of Thute Subbayyamma for an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy. No.154, on 09.06.1971. Thus, the subject matter of the disputed property is the part and parcel of the sale deed dated 09.06.1971 executed for an extent of Ac.1.00, which is in favor of Thute Subbayyamma, in which the Petitioners have no manner of right and Thute Subbayyamma also lost her right as she left the disputed property as road, by showing in the sale deed executed by her. As such, the Gram Panchayat S.Atchutapuram rightly refused to grant permission for construction of proposed buildings in the disputed property by the Petitioner, as the Petitioner has no manner or right, title 3 and possession over the same after 1971. As such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed."
5. Having regard to the above facts and as the Petitioner alienated the property, this Court is of the opinion that the request of the Petitioner cannot be granted and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 13.07.2022 SM.
4
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR W.P. No. 18919 of 2009 Date: 13.07.2022 SM.