Jupudy Venkata Ramana Murthy, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ******** WRIT PETITION NO.16779 of 2015 Between :

Jupudy Venkata Ramana S/o.Late Jagannadha Rao, Aged about 48 yrs, Occu : Business, C/o.The Ashraya Residency, Near Pushkar Ghat, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District.

.. Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, (Municipal Administration Department), Secretariat, Hyderabad & others .. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED : 11.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

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 Their Lordship wish to : Yes / No see the fair copy of the Judgment ?

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.16779 of 2015 ORDER :

This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 08.06.2015 ordering eviction of the petitioner from the subject premises. This Court by order dated 01.07.2015 having noticed that prior opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the petitioner as required under Section 5 (1) of Andhra Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1968 (for short ' the Act, 1968'), in view of the urgency expressed by the learned Advocate General, and in view of on going pushkarams, a direction was issued to the petitioner to appear before the Estate Officer, Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry (3rd respondent) on 03.07.2015 at 10.30 A.M., with all relevant documents, to file counter and to make his submissions. On consideration of such appearance and making submissions, the 3rd respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders as warranted by law.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the evidence of the complainant was completed and recording of evidence in so far as the petitioner is concerned is in process. He further submits that the urgency as expressed by the learned Advocate General is over and as Pushkarams are concluded, the petitioner will have to work out his remedies as and when appropriate orders are passed by the 3rd respondent.

3. Recording the said submissions, this writ petition is disposed of, as no further orders are required, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies if he is aggrieved by any decision passed by the 3rd respondent in pursuant to the proceedings under Section 5 (1) of the Act, 1968, concerning the premises bearing D.No.11-10-2, Ashraya Residency, Municipal Corporation Building, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 11th August, 2015.

Rds