THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1381 of 2014 Between:
Vadde Gangappa, Chittoor District.
DATE: 11.11.2014 … Appellant And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others.
… Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1381 of 2014 Judgment: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be preferred against the order dated 19.09.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby His Lordship was pleased to dispose of the writ petition.
The writ petitioner-appellant filed the writ petition praying for quashing of the order of assignment of the land in an extent of Ac.5.00 in Survey No.1205/2 of 90- Bandarlapalli Revenue Village, Ramakuppam Mandal, Chittoor District. The learned trial Judge found that before this impugned order of assignment was passed, the same land was assigned to the writ petitioner-appellant. However, such assignment was cancelled by previous order and this order of cancellation of assignment in favour of the writ petitioner was not challenged before the learned trial Judge.
Today, we are informed that this order of cancellation has been challenged by way of regular statutory appeal and the same is pending. In view of this fact, we think that we should not entertain the appeal for rendering a decision as to whether the order of subsequent assignment made in favour of respondents 4 and 5 should be quashed and should be cancelled or not.
We therefore dispose of the appeal after admitting the same by the following orders:
The appellate authority shall decide the appeal in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. We make it clear that the decision shall be rendered uninfluenced by the observation and finding of the Hon’ble trial Judge on the merit of the matter. It was contended before us so also before the Hon’ble trial Judge that no notice was issued before cancellation of the assignment. The learned trial Judge, it appears, has made certain observations in regard to the service of notice. We think that without proper material, such a conclusive finding should not have been reached. We ask the appellate authority to do so on receipt of the evidence. As regards the issue of possession is concerned, we think we should not give any finding as to the factual aspect of possession at this stage. We make it clear it would be open for the parties to approach the appropriate forum on the physical possession of the property in question.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand closed. No order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 11.11.2014
va