Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Thati Sri Rama Murthy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 February, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITON NO.3650 of 2020
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, questioning the action of respondents in allotting the land to Respondent No.5, which is belonging to the petitioner vide document bearing R.O.C.No.126/JML. S.A.1996/88, dt.07-08-1996 in Palacherla Rajavaram Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, West Godavari District in Sy.No.17/1, which is covered by Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 as amended by Act No.1 of 70 and consequently hold that the said action of respondents is violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 as amended by Act No.1 of 70 and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
Though the petitioner made several allegations in the writ affidavit filed along with the writ petition, the truth or otherwise in those allegations need not be adjudicated by this Court, in view of submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue that the respondent authorities will follow due process of law.
In Rame Gowda (D) By Lrs vs M. Varadappa Naidu (D) By Lrs. & Anr1, Ram Rattan v. State of Uttar Pradesh2 and Munshi Ram v. Delhi Administration3, the Supreme Court held as follows:-
1
Appeal (civil) 7662 of 1997 2 1975 AIR 1674 = 1975 SCR 299 3 1968 AIR 702 = 1968 SCR (2) 408 2 "...to forcibly dispossess citizens of their private property, without following the due process of law, would be to violate a human right, as also the constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution."
Recording submission of the learned Assistant Government for Revenue, as there is no proposal to interfere with the possession of petitioner over the subject land, and in view of the judgments of Apex Court referred above, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps, except by due process of law.
With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of both the counsel. However, this order will not preclude the respondents to take appropriate steps, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 20-02-2020 Note: Issue CC by 27-02-2020.
B/o.
IS 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITON NO.3650 of 2020 Date: 20-02-2020 Note: Issue CC by 27-02-2020.
B/o.
IS