IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.735 of 2014 BETWEEN Dandu Penchalaiah and others.
AND ... PETITIONERS Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. K. MURALIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Petitioners, who are 25 in number, claim that they belong to BC and ST community and landless poor persons and that out of vast extent of Government land in Sy.Nos.114 and 123 of Makthapuram village, Sangam Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, they are in occupation of land in Sy.Nos.113/2, 114/3 and 123/1. Petitioners allege that the Tahsildar, respondent No.4, has taken steps to assign the Government land in the ensuring 7th Land Distribution Program without considering their claim. Petitioners also place reliance upon a representation dated 11.11.2013 submitted by them, seeking assignment in their favour, to the District Collector and also to the Tahsildar. Alleging inaction, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader has not received instructions, in my view, since the limited relief sought for by the petitioners is with regard to consideration of their representation and claim for assignment, the writ petition can be disposed of instead of keeping it pending on the file of this Court.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader also states that if any such representation is pending, the same shall be considered in accordance with the policy of the State expeditiously.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 2 and 4 to consider the representation of the petitioners, referred to above, in accordance with the policy of the State, on its own merits and then pass appropriate orders thereon expeiditiously. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J June 16, 2014 DSK