K.Venkata Ramaiah vs K.Kondal Rao
2021 Latest Caselaw 2692 Tel

        HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
             SRI M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
                                  AND
       HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

                  WRIT APPEAL No.472 OF 2021

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble The Acting Chief Justice Sri M.S.Ramachandra Rao)

      Heard Y. Chandra Shekar, learned Senior Counsel appearing

for the appellants, Sri A. Sudharshan Reddy, learned Senior counsel

appearing for the 1st respondent and learned Government Pleader for

Revenue for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

2. In the impugned order dt.14.09.2021 in W.P.No.7367 of 2021,

the learned Single Judge had permitted withdrawal of the said Writ

Petition on the request made by Sri G. Madhusudhan Reddy, counsel

on record for the 1st respondent, and granted liberty to the 1st

respondent to avail the remedy of filing an appeal before the appellate

tribunal under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms

(Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 challenging the order of

primary authority in C.C.No.720/M/1975. The learned Single Judge

also vacated the interim order dt.16.04.2021 and dismissed the Writ

Petition as withdrawn by granting liberty.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants points out that in the letter

dt.13.09.2021 addressed to the Registrar (Judicial) by the learned

counsel for the 1st respondent while the counsel did say that the 1st

respondent intends to withdraw the Writ Petition to avail the remedy

of appeal before the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal (for short, ::2::

"LRAT"), and has requested the matter to be listed for "withdrawal",

there was no specific request for grant of liberty to file the appeal

before the LRAT. He also points out that under the provisions of the

said Act, an appeal can be filed only by the parties to the proceedings

or the Government and that the 1st respondent, if he intends to file an

appeal before the LRAT against the order passed in

C.C.No.720/M/1975, has to seek leave to file such appeal and grant of

such leave is not automatic and the appellants are entitled to oppose it

as well.

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the 1st respondent states

that the 1st respondent would file an application for grant of leave to

file the appeal before the LRAT challenging the order passed in

C.C.No.720/M/1975 and that if such application is filed, the

appellants can certainly file an objection, which the LRAT would

adjudicate.

5. In view of the said statement of the learned Senior counsel

appearing for the 1st respondent, this Writ Appeal is disposed of

stating that notwithstanding the statement made in the order dt.

14.09.2021 in W.P.No.7367 of 2021 by the learned Single Judge

granting liberty to the 1st respondent to file the appeal before the

LRAT, the 1st respondent shall file an application for grant of leave to

file such appeal and the appellants are permitted to oppose the said

application and then the said Tribunal shall decide the matter ::3::

uninfluenced by the orders passed by this Court on 14.09.2021 in

W.P.No.7367 of 2021.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of.

7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Appeal

shall also stand dismissed. No costs.

______________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, ACJ

___________________ T.VINOD KUMAR, J

Date: 20.09.2021.

ES