Meruva Narasamma v. The Tahsildar, (Formerly Called As M.R.O)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT HYDERABAD MONDAY THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN :PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE: NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 20073 OF 2011 Between:
1. Meruva Narasamma W/o. Meruva Venkata Ramana
2. Meruva Padmavathi W/o Chandra Sekhar
3. Bodagala Rajalakshmi W/o. Late Bodagala Prakash
4. Soma Lakshamma (died) As per LR. Soma Nagabushanam S/o Late Soma Subbaiah.
5. K Bhagyamma (Died) As per LR . K. Muneiah S/o. Late Pedda Muneiah
6. Masa Lakshamma (Died) As per LR Masa Ramachandraiah S/o. Lakshumaiah
7. Meruva Lakshmi Devi W/o. Meruva Venkatesh
8. Nallu Lakshmi Devi W/o. N. Subba Rayudu .....
Petitioners AND
1. The Tahsildar, (Formerly called as M.R.O) Sidhout Mandal, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajampet, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa.
3. The District Collector, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order declaring the action of the respondents in directing the petitioners not to proceed with the construction of house on the land in Sy. No. 936/A, 926/A and 966/A an extent of 0.02 to 0.03 cents of each allotted to the petitioners Ref. No. A/82/2001 dt. 24/03/2001, total admeasuring 0.
18 cents, respectively situated at Pedapalli Village, now under Upparapalli (V) Grampanchayat Sidhout Mandal, Kadapa District, without issuing any notice is arbitrary unreasonable and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house site patta to an extent of 0.02 to 0.03 cents of each admeasuring 0.18 cents in Sy. No. 936/A, 926/A and 966/A at Peddapalli Village, (now under Upparapalli (V) Grampanchayat) Sidhout Mandal, Kadapa District, without following due process of law.
The petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Boya Ravinder Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Govt. Pleader for Revenue on behalf of Respondents, the Court made the following (Contd. 2. ) . 2 .
ORDER:
"It is stated that the petitioners lands were acquired for the purpose of construction of Somasila Project. They were ousted from their native villages. Subsequently, they were assigned house site pattas in the year 2001. On the ground that they could not construct houses so far, attempts are now made to either cancel those pattas or prevent the petitioners from raising constructions on the lands.
If the petitioners are themselves ousted from land of their own and they have been assigned land for construction of house site, sympathies must be extended to the petitioners and they should not be prevented from constructing houses.
If the petitioners compete construction of the houses within the next six months and occupy the same, their possession be not disturbed or they may not be interrupted further in the matter by the respondents. Call after four weeks."
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To
1. The Tahsildar, (Formerly called as M.R.O) Sidhout Mandal, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajampet, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa.
3. The District Collector, Y.S.R. District, Kadapa.
4. Two CCs to the Govt. Pleader for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT)
5. One CC to Sri Boya Ravinder Reddy, Advocate (OPUC)
6. One spare copy.
BV HIGH COURT NRR.J DATED: 18-07-2011
NOTE:
CALL AFTER FOUR WEEKS
ORDER
W.P.NO. 20073 OF 2011 DIRECTION DRAFTED: BY BV DATED : 19-07-2011 HIGH COURT NRR.J DATED: 18-07-2011
NOTE:
CALL AFTER FOUR WEEKS
ORDER
W.P.NO. 20073 OF 2011 DIRECTION