Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Pusapatisubba Raju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 19 November, 2020

Author: D Ramesh

Bench: D Ramesh

|
|

[ 3208 ]

(SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER,/S
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
:PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

WRIT PETITION NO: 21081 OF 2020

  

Between:
PusapatiSubba Raju, S/o Satyanarayana Raju, aged about 74 years, R/o Plot No.17,
GF-2, APSEB Colony Seetammadhara, Visakhapatnam Urban, Visakhapatnam - 530
013.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Revenue

Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.
The Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

.. .Respondents

oN

WHEREAS the Petitioner above named through his Advocate Smt KAVITHA
GOTTIPATI 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 an appropriate Order, Direction or Writ more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3 respondent in issuing
Endorsement bearing Rce.No.413/2019/A dt.10-11-2019 rejecting the application for
mutation of the petitioner's name in web land and issuance of e-pass book in respect of
the lands in Sy.No.71/1, 71/2, 72/2, 73/1A, 73/2, 73/6 admeasuring Ac.17.46 cents
situated at Paradesipalem village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam
District in favour of the petitioner, is arbitrary, illegal and unjust and consequently set
aside the samé, while directing the respondent No.3 to mutate the name of the
petitioner in the revenue records in respect of the above mentioned lands.

AND WHEREAS the High Court upon perusing the petition and affidavit filed
herein and upon hearing the arguments of Smt Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate for the
Petitioner and GP for Revenue for the Respondents, 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, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Amaravati, State of Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.
3. The Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

are be and hereby directed to show cause either appearing in person or through an-
Advocate, as to why in the circumstances set out in the petition and the affidavit filed
therewith (copy enclosed) this WRIT PETITION should not be admitted, on or before
17-12-2020, on which date the case stands posted for hearing.

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
respondent Nos.3 herein not to dispossess or in any manner interfere with the peaceful
possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the lands in Sy.No.71/1, 71/2,
72/2, 73/1A, 73/2, 73/6 admeasuring Ac.17.46 cents situated at Paradesipalem village,
Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of
WP No.21081 of 2020, on the file of the High Court.
 

fo

The Court made the following:
ORDER:

"Notice before admission returnable in four (4) weeks. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned orders passed on 10.11.2019 were not served on the petitioner, only at the time of contempt case, learned GP has served these order copies to him. In the orders passed by the 3™ respondent the last paragraph reads as follows:

"In view of the above, the subject lands cannot be incorporated in your favour as you have not turned up to the notice issued and did not submit any documents in your favour. It is observed that there exists an ambiguity between you and the other claimants mentioned in the above para and also several sale transactions are being made on the subject lands since many years. Hence, your application made for incorporation of your name in the webland is hereby rejected on above reasons".

In the said paragraph, the authorities have stated that despite notice, petitioner has not submitted any documents. Rebutting to the said contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no notices were received and not order also received by the petitioner. Learned GP requests further time to produce the record to show whether the notices were served on the petitioner and any acknowledgment is available in the office or not.

In view of the above, the impugned orders dated 10.11.2019 are suspended and the respondents are directed to file their counter. Post on 17.12.2020."

'Sd/- K. JAGANMOHAN DEPUTY | EGISTRKAR ITTRUE COPY// x

- SECTION OFFICER, | are | RAR To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, State of Andhra Pradesh, Guntur District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. The Tahsildar, Visakhapatnam (Rural) Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. (Addresses 1 to 3 by RPAD- along with a copy of petition and affidavit) One CC to Sri. Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] One spare copy oN Oak MM HIGH COURT DRJ DATED:19/11/2020 NOTE: POST ON 17.12.2020 NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION WP.No.21081 of 2020 INTERIM SUSPENSION