Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Srikakulapusamrajyam, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 February, 2020
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.2574 of 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned proceedings of resumption issued by the 4th respondent vide Rc.B.262/2019, Dt.17.09.2019 in respect of the total land admeasuring Ac.1.62 cents at Sy.No.15-19, 15-20, 15-21, 15-22 Kalaturu Village, Agiripallimandal, Krishna district, belonging to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional without notice, violation of Article 300- A of the Constitution apart from Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same."
It is the case of the petitioner that she is in possession and enjoyment of the property being landless poor and that a notice in Form-I was issued under Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Rules, 2007 (for short Rules, 2007). The petitioner submitted her explanation to the notice issued in Form-I, later the order dated 17.09.2019 impugned in this petition was passed by respondent No.4 vide Rc.B.262/209 and communicated to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before Revenue Divisional Officer on 27.01.2020 and it is pending before Revenue Divisional Officer at pre-registration stage, but no application for grant of interim stay was filed along with the appeal.
The main grievance of the petitioner is that the appeal filed before the Revenue Divisional Officer is not yet registered, taking advantage of the same, the respondents are contemplating to dispossess the petitioner. No doubt, in the absence of any stay MSM,J WP_2574_2020 2 granted by the appellate authority, respondents are entitled to take possession of the land in terms of the impugned order.
In any view of the matter, the petitioner having filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer on 27.01.2020 challenging the impugned proceedings issued by respondent No.4 vide Rc.B.262/2019 dated 17.09.2019, cannot prosecute the same proceedings before this Court. Since the petitioner is disentitled to prosecute parallel proceedings both before the appellate authority and before this Court invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. However, it is appropriate to direct the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned to register the appeal filed by the petitioner on 27.01.2020 against the order passed by respondent No.4 vide Rc.B.No.262/2019 dated 17.09.2019 within two (2) months from today.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 06.02.2020 Ksp