\ ■ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY. THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE j( PRESENT \ THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 23821 OF 2020 Between: Viswsasarai Sainath, S/o Late Viswasarai Narasimha Rao, (Vandava Doraa) (Ex-MP), aged about 33 years, R/o.Vanduva Village, Veeraghatam Mandalam, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, (Revenue), A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam District. 4. The Tahsildar, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 5. Viswasarao Lakshminarayana (Died) as per L.Rs R6 to R9, S/o.late Appanna Dora, aged about 70 years, R/o. Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 6. Viswasarao Maheswara Rao, S/o. Late Lakshminarayana, Aged about 47 years, R/o. Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 7. Viswasarao Amar, S/o. Late Lakshminarayana, Aged about 46 R/o. Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 8. Markanda Saradha, W/o. Gowripathi, Aged about 48 years, R/o. Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. 9. Viswasarao Niraja, W/o. Ramakrishna, Aged about 45 years, R/o. Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. years th (RR 6 to 9 are brought on record as L.Rs of the deceased 5 respondent as per the Court’s order dt.22.01.2025 in lA No.2/2024 in Writ Petition and affidavit) 1* - ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in not considering the representation dated 17-8-2020 and proceeding further laying the plots for allotting house sites to the weaker section in collusion with the 5^^ respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the representation dated 17-8-2020 submitted by the petitioner herein and initiate necessary action to dissolve the dispute either by allotting alternative site to the petitioner and his family members are pay the compensation for the Ac.3-22 cents, in Sy.No.182/6 Kata No.321, Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to allot house sites pattas in an extent of Ac.6-44 cents in Sy.No.182/6, Kata No.321 Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of construction of houses in Survey No. 182/6 without conducted proper survey, including my land an extent of acres 3-22 cents, in ^ Survey No. 182/6 Katha No. 321, Vanduva Village, Veeraghattam Mandal, Srikakulam District (which is already in the name of Petitioner's father), pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI REDDY VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents: SRI TADDI NAGESWARA RAO The Court made the following: ORDER T T\ 1 APHC010358322020 THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 23821/202^ IN [3458] THE Between; ...PETITIONER Viswsasarai Sainath AND ...RESPONDENT(S) State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. REDDY VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE 2.TADD1 NAGESWARA RAO The Court made the following; ORDER:- Heard Sri Reddy Venkata Rannana, learned counsel for the petitioner Pleader for Revenue, appearing for the and learned Assistant Government respondents. of the respondents, in not dated 17.08.2020 and proceeding further in ^ in favour of the beneficiaries 2. Being aggrieved by the action considering the representation laying plots for allotting the same as house sites in 2 Navaratnalu Pedalandiriki lllu”, the instant of the government scheme viz Writ Petition is filed. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, has placed on record a copy of the instructions received by him from Tahsildar, dated 28.11.202, which reads as 3. follows; “In this connection, it is humbly submitted that the Out of the total land available in Sy.No. 186-2 measuring an total extent of Ac. 6.44 cts, acquired an extent of Ac. 1.16 cts only from the share of Sri Viswasarayi Lakhsmi Narasimha Dora and the remaining extent belongs to legal heirs of Sri Late Viswasarayi Narasimha Dora where petitioner is one of the legal heir and further submitted the share of land an extent of Ac. 3.22 cts in Sy.no. 182-6 is remains with the legal heirs of the Sri Late Viswasarayi Narasimha Dora as prayed by the petitioner in the prayer. In this connection, it is further submitted that there is no title dispute on the scheduled land as mentioned in the affidavit by the petitioner and the dispute is with the other family members of the petitioner which is not part of the acquisition of the land. Government has been acquired undisputed land only from Sri Viswasarayi Lakhsmi Narasimha Dora. ” The said instructions of the 4*^ respondent - Tahsildar, are placed 5. on record. The leaned counsel for the un-official respondents contends that in the land acquisition proceedings, the name of the 5*^ respondent has been recorded, since no objections were received by the land acquisition officer from any one, the compensation was disbursed in favour of the 5 respondent. 6. th 3 Considered the rival submissions. 7. that has been filed by the stated to be pending. This Court would be met if the Tahsildar is The Tahsildar is It is stated that the representation 17-08-2020 before Tahsildar is ■1 8. petitioner on is of the view that the interests of justice in accordance with law. directed to dispose of the same directed to dispose of the representation in accordance with law, and the un-official therefore sufficient opportunity to the petitioner after affording respondent(s). the Writ Petition is disposed of. There With the above direction 9. shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //true copy// OFFICER SE' To, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. 1 The Principal Secretary, (Revenue) ' secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh Srikakulam District, Srikakulam. 2 The District Collector, , 3. .The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam Distnc . 4 The Tahsildar, Veeraghattam Mandal Srikakulam District. 5. One CC to Sri Reddy Venkata Ramana, Advocate (OPUC) Rao, Advocate[OPUCl Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. One CC to Sri Taddi Nageswara 7. Two CCS to GP for Revenue, High 8. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:22/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.23821 of 2020 O % 1 5 FEB 2025 Current Section . ^ DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS