Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri Kaki Prakash Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 7 December, 2020
Author: M.Ganga Rao
Bench: M.Ganga Rao
| [ 2696 ]
(SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 22169 OF 2020
Between:
Sri Kaki Prakash Reddy, S/o. Appala Reddy,
Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries
Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. Rep.
by its Managing Director,
3. The AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Zonal Office at Visakhapatnam.
Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by its Zonal Manager,
4. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District.
5. M/s. Sri Durga Industries, Rep. by its Managing Partner, A partnership firm
bearing Regd.No. 306/2016
[i].Smt. Pujachand, W/o. Naveen Chand, Aged about 45 years, business, R/o. Flat
No. 302, Street No. 8, Devi Palace, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad. | P
{li].Sri Chintalapalli Jalander Reddy, S/o. Ch. Mallareddy, Aged about 55 years,
business, R/o. Flot No. 128, Balamrai Housing Society, Mahendra Hills, East
Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iii]. Peddintli Rao Valavala, S/o. So/. V. Satyanarayana, Aged about 50 years,
business, R/o. Flot No. 202, SMR Ram Residency, West Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iv].Sattireddy Mahender Reddy, S/o. Sri K. Pulla Reddy, Aged about 55 years,
business, R/o. 1-2-67, Kakatiya Nagar, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad. °
6. M/s Sri Vijayalakshmi Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner, Bearing No. 356/2017,
[ i ]Gumpina Ramesh Gupta, S/o. late Sri Sarveswara Rao, Aged about 61 years,
Business, R/o. 7-9-29, Matimanuguriveedhi, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531 001.
[ii], Hanumalisetty Jagadish, S/o. Sri Venkata Raju, Aged about 60 years, business,
R/o. 11-3-30, Jampavari Street, Near Jain Temple, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531
001.
Respondents
WHEREAS the Petitioner above named through his/her Advocate M R S$
SRINIVAS presented this 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, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT.
OF MANDAMUS
[A].to declare the highhanded action of the Respondents 2 & 3 in + trying to dispossess
me and others from an extent of 1.80 cents in Sy.No. 46/4 and 0.31 cents in Sy.No.
46/5 and 0.80 cents in Sy.No. 48 and 1.30 in Sy.No. 49 of Chinagantyada Village,
Gajuvaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam without following the due process of law is illegal,
arbitrary and unjust and contrary to the order passed in W.P.No. 1238 of 2007
[B].to declare the action of the Respondents 2 & 3 in executing the agreement dated
13.09.2019 executed by the 3rd Respondent in favour of the 5th Respondent in respect
of Ac. 2.38 cents situated at Block-B, Industrial Park, Autonagar, Visakhapatnam,
situated in Sy.No. 46/4 part of Chinagantyada Village, Gajuvaka Mandal,
Visakhapatnam and sale deed dated 12.02.2018 in favour of the 6th Respondent in
respect of 7300 Sq. meters or 8732.06 Sq. Yds situated in Sy.No. 48 part executed by
_/the 3td respondent part of Chinagantyada Village, Gajuvaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam as
~ illegal, arbitrary and unjust.
[C].to declare the action of the respondents 2 & 3 in not considering our case for
allotment of land in Sy.No. 46/4 and 46/5 and 47 and 48 in our favour even on payment
of market value as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and without jurisdiction.
AND WHEREAS the High Court upon perusing the petition and affidavit filed
herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MR S Srinivas, Advocate for the
Petitioner, directed issue of notice to the Respondents herein to show cause as to why
this WRIT PETITION should not be admitted.
You viz:
1. The Principal Secretary, Industries Department, State of A.P., A.P. Secretariat,
Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The Managing Director, AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Mangalagiri,
Guntur District.
3. The Zonal Manager, AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Zonal Office at
Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh.
4. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District.
5. M/s. Sri Durga Industries, Rep. by its Managing Partner, A partnership firm
bearing Regd.No. 306/2016
[i].Smt. Pujachand, W/o. Naveen Chand, Aged about 45 years, business, R/o. Flat
No. 302, Street No. 8, Devi Palace, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad. |
[li].Sri Chintalapalli Jalander Reddy, S/o. Ch. Mallareddy, Aged about 55 years,
business, R/o. Flot No. 128, Balamrai Housing Society, Mahendra Hills, East
Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iii]. Peddintli Rao Valavala, S/o. So/. V. Satyanarayana, Aged about 50 years,
business, R/o. Flot No. 202, SMR Ram Residency, West Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iv].Sattireddy Mahender Reddy, S/o. Sri K. Pulla Reddy, Aged about 55 years,
business, R/o. 1-2-67, Kakatiya Nagar, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad.
6. Mls Sri Vijayalakshmi Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner, Bearing No. 356/2017,
[ i ]Gumpina Ramesh Gupta, S/o. late Sri Sarveswara Rao, Aged about 61 years,
Business, R/o. 7-9-29, Matimanuguriveedhi, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531 001.
[ii]. Hanumalisetty Jagadish, S/o. Sri Venkata Raju, Aged about 60 years, business,
R/o. 11-3-30, Jampavari Street, Near Jain Temple, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531
001.
are directed to show cause on or before 04-01-2021 to which date the case stands
posted as to why in the circumstances set out in the petition and affidavit filed therewith
(copy enclosed) this WRIT PETITION should not be admitted.
IA NO: 2 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 grant
stay of dispossession of the petitioner and other members of the family from extent of
1.80 cents in Sy.No,.46/4 and 0.31 cents in Sy.No. 46/5 and Ac. 0.80 cents in Sy.No. 48
and 1.30 in Sy.no. 49 of chinagantyada village, Gajuvaka mandal, Visakhapatnam,
pending disposal of WP No. 22169 of 2020, on the file of the High Court.
IA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in W.P., the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to
consider the case of the petitioners as stated in their representations dates 13.07.2020
and 08.08.2020 for allotment of land in their favour, pending disposal of WP No. 22169
of 2020, on the file of the High Court.
The Court made the following
ORDER:
Notice before admission.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on the respondents 5 and 6 by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due and file proof of service into the Registry.
The case of the petitioner is that he and other family members are the owners of land situated in Sy.Nos.51, 52 & 53 of Chinagantyada Village, which is known as Autonagar. They are also in possession of land to an extent of Ac.1.80 cents in Sy.No.46/4, Ac.0.31 cents in Sy.No.46/5, Ac.0.80 cents in Sy.No.48 and Ac.1.30 cents in Sy.No.49 situated in Chinagantyada Village, Gajuvaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. They constructed a thatched hut, RCC residential huts and they have been cultivating and in possession of the said land. They dug bore wells and open wells in the said land to cater to their drinking needs and other purposes. Thus, they are in open hostile possession of the said land. When the respondents 2 and 3 are highhandedly tried to evict them in spite of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.1238 of 2007, they were constrained to file O.S.No.145 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka and the said suit was dismissed on 23.10.2017 and against which they preferred an appeal, which is pending. But, the respondents 2 and 3 entered into sale agreements with the respondents 5 and 6. The respondent authorities have no jurisdiction to sell the land to the third parties as private sale under the guise of establishing an industrial unit. It is settled law that the respondents 2 and 3 can only alienate any of its lands only in public auction but not otherwise. Though the petitioner made representations to the respondent authorities, they have not taken any action and furthermore they are trying to dispossess him and others, without following due process of law, which is illegal and arbitrary.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities have no jurisdiction to create rights in favour of third parties to fight the litigation without following due process of law. The sale deed dated 12.02.2018 and an agreement of sale dated 13.09.2019 in favour of respondents 5 and 6 are without jurisdiction and that the public largesse cannot be disposed of without resorting to public auction at their whims and fancies.
Sri S.Ugranarasimha, learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3, states that the petitioner is not in possession of the subject land and taken this Court to the judgment passed in O.S.No.145 of 2007 and order passed in W.P.No.1238 of 2007 and stoutly opposed for grant of interim direction.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel, and on considering the order passed by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.1238 of 2007 dated 02.04.2007 and the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.145 of 2007 dated 23.10.2017 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, this Court prima facie satisfied that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for grant of order of status quo.
Hence, all the parties to the writ petition are directed to maintain status quo obtained as on today in all respects, till 04.01.2021.
Post on 04.01.2021.
Sd/- R.Karthikeyan ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITTRUE COPY// :
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Industries Department, State of A.P., A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
2. The Managing Director, AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.
3. The Zonal 'Manager, AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Zonal Office at Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh.
4. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District.
5. M/s. Sri Durga Industries, Rep. by its Managing Partner, A partnership firm bearing Regd.No. 306/2016 [i].Smt. Pujachand, W/o. Naveen Chand, Aged about 45 years, business, R/o. Flat No. 302, Street No. 8, Devi Palace, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad. | .
[li].Sri Chintalapalli Jalander Reddy, S/o. Ch. Mallareddy, Aged about 55 years, business, R/o. Flot No. 128, Balamrai Housing Society, Mahendra Hills, East Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iii]. Peddintli Rao Valavala, S/o. So/. V. Satyanarayana, Aged about 50 years, business, R/o. Flot No. 202, SMR Ram Residency, West Maredpalli, Secunderabad.
[iv].Sattireddy Mahender Reddy, S/o. Sri K. Pulla Reddy, Aged about 55 years, business, R/o. 1-2-67, Kakatiya Nagar, Hubsiguda, Hyderabad.
6. Mis Sri Vijayalakshmi Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner, Bearing No. 356/2017, [ i ]Gumpina Ramesh Gupta, S/o. late Sri Sarveswara Rao, Aged about 61 years, Business, R/o. 7-9-29, Matimanuguriveedhi, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531 001. [ii]. Hanumalisetty Jagadish, S/o. Sri Venkata Raju, Aged about 60 years, business, R/o. 11-3-30, Jampavari Street, Near Jain Temple, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam-531
001. (Addressee Nos 1 to 6 by RPAD along with a copy of petition and affidavit)
7. One CC to Sri M.R.S. Srinivas, Advocate (OPUC) wa
8. One CC to Sri S.Ugranarasimha, standing counsel (OPUC)
9. One spare copy Skm HIGH COURT MGR,J DATED:07/12/2020 NOTE: POST ON 04-01-2021 NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION WP.No.22169 of 2020 STATUS QUO