Annam Nagulu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1851 AP

 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI

              MAIN CASE No.: W.P.No.5137 of 2022

                          PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                                Office
       DATE                               ORDER
No                                                                                 Note

5.    19.04.2022 TRR, J
                                     I.A.No.2 of 2022
                                                                                  Transferred
                                                                                  to I/O
                       The present implead petition is filed by the               folder
                                                                                  before
                petitioner/proposed 4th respondent. The petitioner                correction

filed W.P.No.4213 of 2019 before this Court against the official respondents in not considering the application for removal of encroachment in front of his plot in T.S.No.908, Chilakaluripet Road, besides Nagoorvali Talkies, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by order dated 08.04.2019 directing the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action for removal of encroachments in accordance with law.

Basing on the said order, the official respondents have issued notice to the Writ Petitioners herein. Later, the Writ Petitioners herein have got filed Writ Appeal No.372 of 2021 against the order in W.P.No.4213 of 2019.

The said Writ Appeal was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 04.01.2022 confirming the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.4213 of 2019 finding that the Writ Petitioner has encroached the land in T.S.No.908 & 909 and directed the official respondents to remove the encroachments. The present implead petitioner was arrayed as the 1st respondent in the said Writ Appeal.

Now the unofficial respondent has filed the present implead petition and the impugned notice was issued based on the representation made by the proposed 4th respondent herein.

The Writ Petitioners herein filed counter affidavit contending that the notices were issued to the petitioners and the proposed 4th respondent is not at all a necessary party to the present Writ Petition.

The petitioner submitted that to add as a party in the Writ Petition, the proposed respondent shall either be a necessary party or a proper party. The proposed implead petitioner does not fall under these two categories. Hence, he need not be a party to the present Writ Petition and relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in, "Kasturi Vs. Iyyamperumal," reported in AIR 2005 SC 2813.

Admittedly, the proposed implead petitioner was a party in the Writ Appeal and basing on the complaint made by the proposed petitioner herein, the respondent authorities have issued notices to the Writ Petitioners herein. The Writ Petition got dismissed and the Writ Appeal was also dismissed. Hence, he is a proper and necessary party to the present Writ Petition.

Accordingly, the I.A. is allowed.

Office is directed to carryout amendments wherever necessary.

______ TRR, J W.P.No.5137 of 2022

Post on 25.04.2022, for filing counter affidavit.

Interim Order granted earlier is extended till then.

______ TRR, J EPS