Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Manchala Venkateswara Reddy vs The Union Of India on 25 November, 2020
Author: D Ramesh
Bench: D Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI _ (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISIDICTION) weoneSoav THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND :-PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH ;-~ WRIT PETITION NO: 10219 OF 2020 ( Between: 1. Manchala Venkateswara Reddy, S/o Krishna Reddy, 2. Manchala Srinivasa Reddy, S/o Krishna Reddy, 3. Asodi Yedukondala Reddy, S/o Venkateswara Reddy, Petitioners AND -- . The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport New Delhi. 2. The Competent Authority Land Acquisition Officer, Joint Collector-Il, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. The Project Director, PIU National Highway Authority of India, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. * 4. The Tahsildar, Bapatla Mandal, Guntur District. , Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in threatening to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in Survey Numbers 46-5B and 29-48 of Maruproluvaripalem village, Bapatla Mandal, Guntur District, for formation of N.H. No.216, of Bapatia Mandal, Guntur District, without paying compensation and without following due process of law under National Highways Act, 1956, as.illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. IA NO: 1.OF 2020 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 direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands in Sy.Nos. 46-5B and 29-4B of Maruproluvaripalem village, Bapatla Mandal, Guntur District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, Pending disposal of WP 10219 of 2020, on the file of the High Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed herein and Order of High Court dated 19-06-2020 & 11.11.2020 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri D. Krishna Murthy, Advocate for the Petitioner, Sri N. Harinath, Asst. Solicitor General for Respondent No.1, GP for Revenue (LA) for Respondent Nos.2 & 4 and of Sri S.S. Varma, Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 3, the Court made the following. ORDER:
Interim order granted earlier shall stand extended by a further period of four (4) weeks. - ' : f Post after two (2) weeks. Sd/- V. DIWAKAR ASSISTANEREGISTRAR (TRUE COPY// CG FOR ASSISTANT EGISTRAR To One CC to Sri D. Krishna Murthy, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri N. Harinath, Asst. Solicitor General (OPUC) One CC to Sri $.S. Varma, Standing Counsel (OPUC) Two CC to GP for Revenue, High Court of A.P. at Amaravati. One spare copy So RWON> SRL HIGH COURT DR,J DATED: 25-11-2020 NOTE: POST AFTER TWO (2) WEEKS ORDER WP.No.10219 of 2020 EXTENSION OF INTERIM ORDER