Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Puppala Lakshmi Narayana vs K Gangadhara Rao on 23 September, 2024
Author: R. Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010373122024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3488]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT APPEAL NO: 724/2024
Between:
Puppala Lakshmi Narayana ...APPELLANT
AND
K Gangadhara Rao and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. A PRABHAKAR SARMA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. ADAPA S BHIMASANKARA RAO
2. GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following Judgment: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The 1st respondent herein had filed W.P.No.17937 of 2023,
before this Court, contending that the land in an area which was categorized
as "Vagu Poramboku", in Sy.No.131/3 to 7 of Kopperla Village, Poosapatirega
Mandal, Vizianagaram District, had been assigned to various persons
including the appellant herein, against the rules and that the activities of the
2
said assignees, including the appellant herein, was affecting the flow of water
during rainy season and the water is not being drained out of the area. The 1st
respondent also contended that he had given a representation, dated
29.07.2024, to the Tahsildar of the area for appropriate action and that the
Tahsildar apart from giving an Endorsement on 02.08.2024 had not taken any
further steps on his representation.
2. Aggrieved by the said inaction, the 1st respondent is said to have
approached this Court.
3. The learned Single Judge had then disposed of the Writ Petition,
by an Order, dated 19.08.2024, at the stage of admission, after perusing a
report submitted by the Tahsildar, before the Court.
4. The Learned Single Judge had disposed of the Writ Petition with
the following directions:-
"It can be seen from the above instructions that the Tahsildar has
already submitted a report to the District Collector on 13.08.2024,
requesting him to initiate action to cancel the D-patta issued in favour
of Sri. Puppala Lakshmi Narayana. As action has already been
initiated in pursuance of the representation submitted by the petitioner
dated 29.07.2024, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this
Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the
2nd respondent to initiate further course of action in pursuance of the
report submitted by the Tahsildar on 13.08.2024 in accordance with
law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight
(08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs."
3
5. Aggrieved by the said Order dated 19.08.2024, the appellant,
who had been arrayed as 5th respondent, in the Writ Petition, has approached
this Court by way of the present Writ Appeal.
6. Sri A. Prabhakar Sarma, learned counsel for the appellant, would
contend that the appellant did not have an opportunity to put forth his case in
the matter. He would further contend that the 1st respondent does not have
locus to raise the issues which had been raised in the Writ Petition as the 5th
respondent was not even a local of the area. He would further submit that the
appellant has adequate material to demonstrate that the land assigned to him
was not Vagu Poramboku land as the said land had been converted much
prior to the present proceedings and the same was not placed before the
Learned Single Judge.
7. Sri Ramgopal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Adapa
Bhimasankara Rao, learned counsel for the 1st respondent would contend that
the order passed by the Learned Single Judge was an innocuous order to take
action on the representation of the 1st respondent and the appellant would
always have an adequate opportunity to set forth his case.
8. A perusal of the operative part of the order, as extracted above,
would show that the Learned Single Judge had directed the District Collector
to act in accordance with the report of the Tahsildar. This would mean that the
District Collector would not have any discretion to consider any objection as
raised by the appellant. Apart from this, it would also be appropriate that the
4
matter is heard by the Learned Single Judge after an opportunity is given to
the appellant herein to put forward his case.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed, setting aside the order of
the Learned Single Judge, dated 19.08.2024, and remanding the matter back
to the Learned Single Judge for hearing. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
________________
HARINATH.N, J.
BSM
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
W.A No.724 OF 2024
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Date: 23.09.2024
BSM
