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 0, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Velpula Srinivasulu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 September, 2023

Author: Ninala Jayasurya

Bench: Ninala Jayasurya

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

             WRIT PETITION No.24906 OF 2023

Between:-
Velpula Srinivasulu, and others
                                                     ... Petitioners
      and

The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, and others
                                                  ... Respondents

Counsel for petitioners :     Mr.T.Venu Gopal

Counsel for respondents :     The G.P. for Revenue

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, who placed a copy of the written instructions dated 21.9.2023 received from the 4th respondent for perusal of this Court.

2. The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the attempts and efforts of the respondents to divide the Donka Road/Punta/Cart Track covered by Survey No.12 admeasuring an extent of Ac.1.60 cents, and Survey No.13 admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.75 cents of Golagamudi Village, Venkatachalam Mandal, into burial ground and to 2 use the same for other purposes than the purpose of pathway to reach the agricultural lands, which is serving as the sole access to the lands of the petitioners and other agriculturists of the Village, in spite of the petitioners' representation dated 14.8.2023, as illegal, arbitrary, and for consequential directions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, with reference to the material on record, sought to advance detailed arguments. However, the same need not be examined in the light of the written instructions referred to supra, wherein it is inter alia stated as follows:

"1. I submit that the survey numbers mentioned in the writ petition Sy.No.12 admeasuring an extent of Acs.1.60 cents is classified as "Channel Poramboke" and Sy.No.13 admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.76 cents is classified as "Foot Path Poramboke" as per the diglot of Anikepalli Village of Venkatachalam Mandal.
2. I further submit that there is an existing canal in Sy.No.12 Acs.1.60 cents and the Sy.No.13 Ac.0.76 cents is being used as a Cart track and the land nature of both the survey numbers did not change. Also, no efforts were made to transform the said lands into burial ground as alleged by the petitioner.
3. I further submit that certain encroachments were identified in Sy.No.12 Acs.1.60 cents classified as "Channel Poramboke" which is an objectionable poramboke and survey has been done and the boundaries of Sy.No.12 Acs.1.60 cents have been plotted. The petitioner misinterpreted the situation and filed this baseless case.
3
4. I also submit that neither proceedings were initiated for formation of burial ground nor the existing cart track was disturbed. The petitioner without having proper knowledge filed that Sy.No.12 Acs.1.60 cents is a cart track but actually it is a "Channel Poramboke" and the channel is existing on ground."

4. In the light of the above stated position, the writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioners are at liberty to seek recourse to Law, if fresh cause of action arises. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J September 22, 2023.

vasu