Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Khaja Bee vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh. on 14 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT APPEAL No.444 of 2021
(Through video conferencing)
Khaja Bee, W/o Late Shaik Hussain Peera,
Aged 50 years, R/o T. Chanugondla Village,
Dhone Mandal, Kurnool District and others.
...Appellants
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, being
represented by Revenue Department,
Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,
Amaravati, Guntur District and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the appellants : Mr. Nageswara Rao Turaga
Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 : GP for Revenue
Counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 6 : Mr.J.U.M.V. Prasad
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Dt:14.09.2021
(per Ninala Jayasurya, J)
Heard Mr. Nageswara Rao Turaga, learned counsel for the
appellants. Also heard the learned Government Pleader for Revenue
appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. J.U.M.V. Prasad, learned
counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 6/writ petitioners.
2. The present writ appeal is preferred against the order dated
12.10.2020 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.18419 of 2020
filed by respondents Nos.4 to 6 herein.
HCJ & NJS,J
3. The writ petition was filed seeking the following relief:
"....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the
2nd respondent in not taking any action for considering the
representation, dated 06.08.2019 submitted by the
petitioners seeking to issue the pattadar pass book and title
deed and by mutating their names in the concerned revenue
records in pursuance to the Judgment and Decree in
O.S.No.43/2004, dated 23.04.2019 even after receiving the
report from the 3rd respondent as long back as on
25.08.2020 in Rc.No.B/196/2020 submitted to him, even
after lapse of almost two months as being illegal, arbitrary
and is in violation of principles of natural justice and fair
play, and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take
steps in the light of the report submitted by the 3rd
respondent on the aforesaid representation of the petitioners
forthwith, and pass such other order or orders as are
deemed fit and proper."
The above writ petition was filed on 05.10.2020 and disposed of on
12.10.2020.
4. The grievance of the appellants is that the learned single Judge has
passed the order at the admission stage, without affording an opportunity
to them by issuing notice.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in fact, an appeal
was preferred against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.434 of 2004
vide A.S.No.67 of 2019 before the District Judge, Kurnool and the same is
HCJ & NJS,J
pending. He also submits that as no notice was issued to the appellants
and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to them, the appellants are
deprived of presenting their case before the learned single Judge. A
perusal of the affidavit filed by the writ petitioners also refers to a writ
petition stated to have been filed by the present appellants in
W.P.No.11910 of 2019.
6. The learned single Judge though has passed the order under
appeal directing the 2nd respondent in the writ petition to take appropriate
steps in accordance with law, in terms of the recommendation made by
the 3rd respondent therein, in Rc.No.B/196/2020, dated 25.08.2020, this
Court, under the aforementioned circumstances, is of the view that before
passing such order, an opportunity of hearing should have been afforded
to the unofficial respondents in the writ petition.
7. In view of the above, the order under appeal is set aside and the
matter is remanded to the learned single Judge for disposal of the same,
after affording an opportunity to the parties on record.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed. No order as to costs. All
pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J
Nn
