Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Karuturi Veera Raghavulu vs Duggirala Srinivasa Rao on 3 February, 2023
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI
&
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
W.A. No. 196 OF 2023
JUDGMENT:(per A.V. Sesha Sai, J) Heard Sri Venkateswara Rao Gudapati, learned counsel for the writ-appellant-5th respondent in the Writ Petition, Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned counsel for the writ petitioner-1st respondent and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the official respondents, apart from perusing the material on record.
The challenge in the present Writ Appeal, preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is to the order dated 01.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.37413 of 2022. The 1st respondent herein, by invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, instituted the aforesaid Writ Petition, assailing the action of the official respondents herein for making red colour markings in the Adangal and 1B ROR in respect of the subject lands. The learned Single Judge vide the order 2 impugned in the present Writ Appeal, allowed the Writ Petition as prayed for.
According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is erroneous, contrary to law and violative of principles of natural justice. In elaboration, it is further contended by the learned counsel that the impugned order came to be passed without issuing any notice to the writ appellant and in view of the same, the ground realities could not be brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and had the same been brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, the order impugned in the present Writ Appeal would not have emanated. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the appellant herein also filed W.P.No.34476 of 2022 on 20.10.2022 for a direction to the official respondents to keep the subject properties in the prohibitory register and in the said Writ Petition, notices were ordered to all the respondents therein, including the first respondent herein on 21.10.2022 and the appearance was also made on 17.11.2022 in the said Writ Petition on behalf of the 1st respondent herein.
3
Per contra Sri Bolla Venkata Rama Rao, learned counsel for the 1st respondent-writ petitioner strongly resisting the Writ Appeal, contends that the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference of this Court under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice as the earlier Writ Petition bearing No.34476 of 2022 filed by the writ appellant herein had become infructuous in view of the subsequent developments, which were impugned in the present Writ Petition.
In the above background, now the issue that emerges for consideration of this Court in the present Writ Appeal is:
"Whether the order passed by the leaned Single Judge is sustainable and tenable, and whether the same warrants any interference of this Court under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent?"
There is absolutely no dispute with regard to the reality that anterior to the filing of the present Writ Petition by the 1st respondent herein, the appellant instituted W.P.No.34476 of 2022 on 20.10.2022 and the receipt of notice ordered in the said Writ Petition is also not in 4 dispute and it is also significant to note that in W.P.No.34476 of 2022, Vakalath was filed on behalf of the 1st respondent herein in the said Writ Petition on 17.11.2022 and on which date, the present W.P.No.37413 of 2022 also came to be instituted.
In W.P.No.37413 of 2022, the appellant herein was correctly arrayed as respondent No.5. As mentioned supra, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that had the pendency of W.P.No.34476 of 2022 been brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, the present order would not have emanated. The fact remains that the pendency of W.P.No.34476 of 2022 was obviously not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge. Therefore, this Court finds sufficient force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the present Writ Petition should have been heard along with W.P.No.34476 of 2022.
For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Appeal is allowed, setting aside the order dated 01.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.37413 of 2022 and consequently, the matter is remanded for fresh disposal. 5 The Writ Petition No.37413 of 2022 shall be posted for admission next week along W.P.No.34476 of 2022. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this case, shall stand closed.
__________________ A.V. SESHA SAI, J ________________________________________________ VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J Date: 03.02.2023 Ks 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO W.A. No. 196 OF 2023 (per A.V. Sesha Sai, J) Date:03.02.2023 Ks