IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.21128 of 2014 BETWEEN Smt. G. Bindu 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. M. JANARDHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioners, who claim to be in possession of house site pattas admeasuring Ac.0.1½ cents each in Sy.Nos.33 and 34 situated at Tirupati Urban Village and Mandal, Chittoor District, have approached this Court contending that they are likely to be dispossessed of their house site pattas without there being any notice and without there being any proceeding initiated for resumption of land. Petitioners also state that they made a representation to the Tahsildar/fourth respondent on 17.07.2014 requesting not to disturb their possession without following due procedure under law. However, since there was interference imminent from the fourth respondent, the present writ petition is filed.
3. On 28.07.2014, while issuing notice to the Assistant Government Pleader to get instructions, the fourth respondent was directed not to dispossess the petitioners except after giving notice.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that no address of the petitioners was found for the purpose of service of notice and as such, the fourth respondent has published a notice in the newspaper fixing the date of enquiry on 04.08.2014.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners have received the notices today and that they would appear and submit their explanation before the fourth respondent.
In view of the fact that the notices issued by the fourth respondent are already received by the petitioners and that the petitioners agree to appear before the fourth respondent and submit their explanation, the writ petition is disposed of directing the fourth respondent to fix a fresh date of hearing in the said enquiry and give an opportunity to the petitioners to submit their explanation and then consider the same along with all other attending circumstances and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and take further consequential action after passing appropriate orders. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 5, 2014 Note: Furnish C.C. of the order by 07.08.2014.
(B/o) DSK