Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

P.T.Gopala Chari And Sons, vs The State Of Ap
2021 Latest Caselaw 3529 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3529 AP
Judgement Date : 15 September, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
P.T.Gopala Chari And Sons, vs The State Of Ap on 15 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. 571 of 2021
                      (Taken up through video conferencing)

P.T. Gopala Chari and Sons,
rep. by its Managing Partner,
P.T.Jagannathan, aged about 60 years,
occ:Business, MSR Colony, Nellore Town,
SPSR Nellore District.                                  .... Appellant

Versus

State of Andhra Pradesh,
rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Water Resources (CE's Establishment)
Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Amaravati, Guntur District and others                   .... Respondents

Counsel for the appellant : Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy

Counsel for the respondents : Ms. S. Siva Kumari Government Pleader

ORAL JUDGMENT Dt.15.09.2021 (Per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Heard Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant.

Also heard Ms. S. Siva Kumari, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation

appearing for the respondents.

2. The appellant/writ petitioner filed W.P.No.18404 of 2021 assailing

G.O.Rt.No.286 dated 09.08.2021 issued by the Secretary to Government, Water

Resources (CE's Establishment) Department, fixing the lease amount of the land

over which the appellant established a petrol pump, for the period from 22.12.2000

to 30.09.2021. The said order was issued in compliance of the order

dated 17.04.2008 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2384 of 2008. Along with the

writ petition, the appellant also filed an application being I.A.No.1 of 2021 for stay

of the aforesaid order dated 09.08.2021.

3. On 27.08.2021, the learned single Judge had passed the following order in

I.A.No.1 of 2021, which is impugned in this writ appeal:

"In the circumstances, in view of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.2384 of 2008, dated 17.04.2008, there shall be interim stay of operation of the G.O.Rt.No.286 dated 09.08.2021 subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the demanded amount within six (6) weeks from now and further subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) per month towards rent for use and occupation of the site in question with effect from 01.10.2021 on or before 10th of every month until further orders."

4. Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the

direction to deposit 25% of the demanded amount within a period of six weeks is

not justified in the facts and circumstances of the case, inasmuch as the appellant

was required to deposit the lease amount fixed retrospectively. He also submits

that as the learned single Judge had imposed an onerous condition, this Court may

suitably modify the order of the learned single Judge by reducing the amount of

deposit to be made by the appellant and by allowing the appellant to deposit the

demanded amount by way of furnishing fixed deposit receipts.

5. Ms. S. Siva Kumari, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation appearing

for the respondents, submits that when the learned single Judge had exercised

discretion in a particular manner, this Court in an appeal arising out of an

interlocutory order may not interfere with such a discretion exercised.

6. The learned single Judge had directed the appellant to deposit only 1/4th of

the demanded amount.

7. We find substance in the argument of the learned Government Pleader and

therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned single

Judge.

8. However, since the respondents had required the appellant to pay the lease

amount fixed from the year 2000 and since twenty years have passed in the

meantime, we permit the appellant to deposit the amount as directed by the learned

single Judge within a period of two (2) months from expiry of the period of 6 (six)

weeks as fixed by the learned single Judge.

9. With the above observation, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No order as to

costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand

dismissed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ                               NINALA JAYASURYA, J
                                                                                CBS





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. 571 of 2021

15th September, 2021 CBS

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter