DASARAJU HIMACHALAM vs THE STATE OF AP
Party Details
- DASARAJU HIMACHALAM
- THE STATE OF AP
- The District Collector
- The Revenue Divisional Officer
- The Thasildar
Case Summary
DASARAJU HIMACHALAM filed Case No. WP 6213/2023 in the High Court Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 Feb 2023 against THE STATE OF AP and The District Collector. The case has had one hearing so far. The case was disposed of on 15 Mar 2023. 1 order has been issued in this matter.
Hearing History (1)
- 15MAR 2023Next Hearing
Judge: N/A
Orders (1)
- 15MAR 2023judgementView Order ↗
Order No: 1
Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION No.
6213 of 2023 Dasaraju Himachalam S/o.
Late D Krishnam Raju, Aged about 49 Years, Cultivation, R/o.
H No.
3-57, P V Puram Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District. ….
Petitioner Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.
By its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Assignment) Department, Secretariat Bldgs, Amaravati, and 3 others. ….Respondents ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents 2.
The grievance of the writ petitioner is that, the 4th respondent is trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land in an extent of Ac.
2.26 cents in Survey No.
303/1, Ac.
0.60 cents in Survey No.
305/1 and Ac.
1.64 cents in Survey No.305/2 in total Ac.
4.50 cents situated in P V Puram, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittor District, without following the due procedure.
3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, originally the petitioner’s grand-mother was given D-Form 2 patta for the subject land with certain terms and conditions and the same was not violated.
Now that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the subject land.
The pattadar passbook issued dated 04.01.2016 vide patta No.406 also discloses the name of the petitioner for the subject land.
While so, the 4th respondent is trying to dispossess the petitioner without issuing any notice and without following any procedure known to law.
4.
On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that, the 4th respondent would deal with the subject land by following the due procedure.
5.
In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the 3rd and 4th respondents are directed not to dispossess the petitioner, if he is in possession of the same as of now except by following the due process of law from the subject land. ject land.
However, it does not preclude for the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to recover/protect the subject land strictly in accordance with law.
6.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off.
There shall be no order as to costs.
3 As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 15.03.2023 PGT /BSK