High Court for State of TelanganaWP/25833/2015dismissed no costs

T.Murthy, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

2015-08-17Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 25833 of 2015 BETWEEN T.Murthy ... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 17.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Without approaching the respondents, petitioner straightaway seeks Mandamus. Apparently petitioner has neither filed any objections nor has approached the Land Acquisition Officer.

3. Petitioner contends that the resumption order was passed with regard to the assigned land admeasuring Ac.4-16 cents in Survey No.391/2 at Ramachandrapuram Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District without notice and without hearing the petitioner.

4. However, neither the resumption order is filed nor there is any allegation that the resumption order was passed without following due process of law. Petitioner merely seeks a direction not to disburse the compensation amount to the fifth respondent who is none other than his mother. It appears that the ex gratia relating to the said assigned land is proposed to be paid to the fifth respondent and the petitioner appears to be objecting thereto. Unless petitioner takes appropriate proceedings in accordance with law either by questioning the said resumption order or by approaching the Land Acquisition Officer by filing an appropriate application seeking apportionment, the Mandamus, as sought for, cannot be granted. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with the liberty above. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 17, 2015 LMV