Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25295 (AP)

Katti Kumari v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

WP/21798/2021 · 2025-02-17

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010357762021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: Katti Kumari and Others Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT 2. GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following The short grievance of the petitioner authority or power, the with the petitioners’ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21798 OF 2021 Katti Kumari and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): P NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR ASSIGNMENT GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following order: grievance of the petitioners is, without any the 5th respondent highhandedly interfering patta lands wherein the flags were marked [3332] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) , without any respondent highhandedly interfering patta lands wherein the flags were marked around their patta lands covered in Survey No.70 of Allamcharla Rajupalem Village, and not taking any action on the petitioners’ representation dated 19.08.2021. 2. Heard Sri P.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Venkata Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for revenue appearing for respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he already instructed his client to approach competent Civil Court. In view of the disputed facts, the writ petition cannot be entertained under Article 226 of Constitution. In view of the same, this writ petition can be closed by giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed with a liberty to the petitioners to approach competent Civil Court. There shall be no order as to costs. 5. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 17th February, 2025 TJN 118 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21798 OF 2021 Dated:17.02.2025 TJN