Nalam Venkata Subba Rao, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH *** Between:

Nalam Venkata Subba Rao and others.

...Petitioners

and State of Andhra Pradesh and others.

... Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 04.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

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 Yes/No see the fair copy of the Judgment?

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the impugned notices as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, to direct the respondents not to proceed further pursuant to the said notices. Representation is made on behalf of petitioners' counsel that he became Government Pleader and informed party to engage another counsel.

Heard Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for respondents 1 and 2, Smt K.Mani Deepika for respondent No.3 and Sri Nimmagadda Venkateswarlu for respondent No.4. Learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration appearing for respondent Nso.1 and 2 and the learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 stated that the lis involved in this writ petition is covered by order of this Court, dated 15.11.2012, in W.P.No.35248 of 2012. Operative portion of the said order reads as follows: "If the owner of a property situate in a Municipal area does not give his consent or agree for the local body to take possession of a portion of his property, respondent No.4 will have to necessarily acquire the land and or structure standing thereon and then alone take possession thereof. Therefore, the 4th respondent without following this process of law will not dispossess the writ petitioner forcefully and seek his consent coercively.

With this, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs." In view of the above, the 4th respondent shall not dispossess the writ petitioners forcefully without following the due process of law or obtained consent forcibly. However, if the writ petitioners give their consent for handing over the land, the same can be accepted.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall also stand closed.

___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J AUGUST 04, 2015 YVL THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

Dt: 04.08.2015 YVL