Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Smt. Potina Appalanarsamma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 9 October, 2020
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
[ 3163 ] (SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION) IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER + TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY : PRESENT: KONE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY... - WRIT PETITION NO: 18446 OF 2020 Y Between: Smt. Potina Appalanarsamma, W/o. Late Satyam, Aged 65 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. Bakkannapalem Village, Near Paradesipalem, Visakhapatnam Rural Visakhapatnam, A.P. Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by. its Pri. Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amravathi, Guntur District. A.P : The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam District, A.P. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, A.P. The Station House Officer, P.M.Palem, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam, A.P. Sringeri Matt, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam Rep by its Manager ON ok Respondents WHEREAS the Petitioner above named through her Advocate SRI K GANI REDDY 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 any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioner and her son Raju by calling them to the police station P.M.Palem, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam without any complaint by the respondent No.5 with an intention to. grab the petitioner's property in Sy.No.32 admeasuring Ac.1- 50 cents and Sy.No.40 adm Ac.1-50 cents of dry land situated at Bakkannapalem village, near Paradesipalem of Visakhapatnam Rural, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and violation of all canons of fair play and natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner by calling her to police station without following due process of law AND WHEREAS the High Court upon perusing the petition and affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K GANI REDDY Advocate for the Petitioner, and of GP FOR HOME for Respondents 1, 2 and 4 and of GP FOR REVENUE for Respondent No.3 directed issue of notice to the Respondent No.5 herein to show cause as to why this WRIT PETITION should not be admitted. You viz: Sringeri Matt, Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam Rep by its Manager are 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, within one week The Court made the following: ORDER:
"Learned Government Pleader for Home has taken notice for official respondents 1, 2 and 4 and requests time to seek instructions. Print the name of learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.3.
Issue notice to 5" respondent. Learned counsel for petitioner is also permitted to take out personal notice on 5" respondent and file proof of service in the Registry. AL List the matter after one week". AL CRO SD/- K.VENKAIAH | ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITTRUE COPY!! Wu ") For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To, _ Sta ehecasessannntancopsaesscrensous wanna eee ene ee IEE AAA ALLELES se
4. One CC to SRI. K GANI REDDY Advocate [OPUC]
2. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [ouT] 3 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] / HIGH COURT CMRJ DATED:09/10/2020 LIST THE MATTER AFTER ONE WEEK NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION WP.No.18446 of 2020