Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing Kanumuri Anji Raju And Anr. vs State Of Andhra Pradesh Represented By ... on 22 March, 1960

Sri Srinivasa Vidya Parishad, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 July, 2021

The law laid down in the above judgments is not in quarrel, but the A.P. Board Revenue Standing Orders have statutory basis, and the enforceability of the Board Standing Orders was considered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of "Kanumuri Anji Raju v. State of Andhra Pradesh16", candidly held that the Standing Orders are merely executive instructions issued for the guidance of officers who are to carry out the policy of the Government.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 40 - Cited by 0 - M S Murthy - Full Document

M. Himachalam Babu, vs Union Of India, on 1 September, 2021

No doubt, it is to be examined whether an establishment of petroleum outlet is in violation of any law. Undoubtedly, B.S.O specifies that the land cannot be transferred to any commercial government departments as per B.S.O 15(8). In fact, Respondent No.12 is not carrying on any commercial activities, but leased out the premises which is lying vacant without any use for the benefit of the State. The enforceability of the Board Standing Orders was considered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Kanumuri Anji Raju v. State of Andhra Pradesh3, candidly held that the Standing Orders are merely executive 3 1960 (2) An.W.R 272 (D.B) MSM,J WP.No.23519 of 2020 23 instructions issued for the guidance of officers who are to carry out the policy of the Government.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 32 - Cited by 1 - M S Murthy - Full Document

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, vs L.Ramesh on 21 April, 2023

25. The question whether Board Standing Orders have statutory force or whether they are mere executive instructions given by the Board of Revenue to it‟s subordinates has been considered in various Judgments, including Katta Rattamma And Others vs. Gannamaneni Kotaiah and Others13, K. Nagarathnammal vs. Ibrahim Sahed14, Pasupuleti Krishnamurthy vs. Annadasu Bapanayya15 and Anji Raju vs. State of Andhra Pradesh16. The consensus that can be seen in these judgments is that these standing orders would have the force of law, where they have been issued under the rule making power conferred under a statute. In cases where no such power can be traced, the standing orders would only be a set of executive instructions, without any statutory basis, given to the 13 (1975) II An.W.R. 122 14 AIR 1955 MAD 305 15 (1956) ALT 566 :: (1956) AN. W.R. 719 16 (1960) 2 AN.W.R. 272 21 HCJ&RRR,J W.A. No.682 of 2022 revenue authorities for the purposes of carrying out their functions. In this case, Board Standing Order 15 and Board Standing Order 16 do not appear to have any statutory backing. In such circumstances the provisions of these Standing Orders cannot control the grant of ryotwari pattas under the provisions of the Estates Abolition Act. Even otherwise, the Board Standing Orders would at best amount to delegated legislation and such delegated legislation cannot control an Act of the Legislature, unless there is a specific stipulation to that effect.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. C. Rajamma And Ors. vs The District Collector And Ors. on 24 March, 1995

At this stage itself it may also be noted that the Division Bench in Kanumuri Anji Raju's case (1 supra) also held that there is no provision at all for makinga temporary assignment either in the Standing Orders issued by the Board of Revenue or in any instructions issued by the Government from time to time. In other words, the Division Bench held S.O.No. 15 provides only for a permanent assignment of the lands. Therefore, it should be held that the assignments made by the Tahsildar in favour of the original assignees were on permanent basis or in other words they were permanent assignments.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 18 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Bondapalli Sanyasi And Ors. on 22 November, 2001

There is no provision at all for making a temporary assignment either in the Board's Standing Orders or in any instructions issued by the Government. To make a permanent assignment, the procedure laid down in BSO No. 15 has to be followed and a patta has to be issued which would give a right to the assignee. Therefore, a person to whom lands have been given for temporary use could not complain of any violation of principles of natural justice if no notice was issued to him before making a permanent assignment of the lands.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 30 - Cited by 6 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Smt. Reddy Bala Vasanthi Kumari, Eg Dist vs Prl. Secretary, Stamps Registration ... on 8 February, 2022

The enforceability of the Board Standing Orders was considered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Kanumuri Anji Raju v. State of Andhra Pradesh1, wherein candidly held that the Standing Orders are merely executive instructions issued for the guidance of officers who are to carry out the policy of the Government.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

V Vijaya Kumar vs Gali Nageshwar Reddy on 3 October, 2024

At this stage itself it may also be noted that the Division Bench in Kanumuri Anji Raju's case (1 supra) also held that there is no provision at all for making a temporary assignment either in the Standing Orders issued by the Board of Revenue or in any instructions issued by the Government from time to time. In other words, the Division Bench held S.O. No. 15 provides only for a permanent assignment of the lands. Therefore, it should be held that the assignments made by the Tahsildar in favour of the original assignees were on permanent basis or in other words they were permanent assignments.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - R R Rao - Full Document

Acharya N G Ranga Agricultural ... vs Ch V V Satyanarayana on 3 October, 2024

At this stage itself it may also be noted that the Division Bench in Kanumuri Anji Raju's case (1 supra) also held that there is no provision at all for making a temporary assignment either in the Standing Orders issued by the Board of Revenue or in any instructions issued by the Government from time to time. In other words, the Division Bench held S.O. No. 15 provides only for a permanent assignment of the lands. Therefore, it should be held that the assignments made by the Tahsildar in favour of the original assignees were on permanent basis or in other words they were permanent assignments.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - R R Rao - Full Document
1