Land rights - EAST GODAVARI

S.No./ W.P.No.	Petitioners & Respondents	Relief sought / Relief Granted	Filing/ Direction/ Follow-up
01. WPMP 1779/93	-do-	Relief Sought by respondents 5 and 6: to vacate the interim order in W.P.M.P.No.10794/92 in W.P.No.8737/92,dt 15-7-92
02. W.A.32/93 A.R.R.	Smt.Rajulamma (tribal) Vs The Agent to Government Rampachodavaram & 3 others		Dismissed
03. WPMP No.3108/93 WPMP No.6426/92 In WP No.5079 WPMVP No.315/92	Kalumukota Nukaraju Vs L.Venkata raju The Chief Secretary, Govt of A.P Dist.Collector E.G, Kakinada 4. The Project Officer ITDA Rampachodavaram on behalf of Kunjam peda Abbayi	Relief Sought: (WPMP.3108/93) To implead the petitioner as respondent No.4. Relief Sought: (WVMP.315/92) to vacate the stay granted in WPMP No.6426/92 in W.P.No.5079/92	filed on 1-3-93 Order
04. 14110/94	Manganti Demuthi & Jiyanna Vs Ganta Ganga & others East Godavari		Disposed On : 11-Nov-1994
05. 5079/92 CMA No. 5/91 A.R.R.	L.Venkata Raju Vs The Chief Secretary, Govt of A.P Dist.Collector E.G,Kakinada The Project Officer ITDA Rampachodavaram on behalf of Kunjam peda Abbayi K.Nookaraju	Brief Note: Originally this land belongs to tribal herein. But the non-tribals falsely got issued settlement patta the same was cancelled by the Dist.Collector (Director of Settlement) agrived by the said order. The non-tribal filed writ petition questioning the validity of G.O.MS.No.741/92. Relief Sought: Call for records relating to Appeal No.5/91 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the order in appeal No.5/91 dt.28-3-1992 passed by the 2nd respondent herein * Relief Granted: “**Writ petition is dismissed”.	Order Filed on 15-4-92 Direction on 4.4.94 land restored to tribals. Disposed On : 04-Apr-1994
06. W.P.No. 5630/92 LTRP No. 250/88 CMA 3/91 A.R.R.	B.Appa Rao, Vs The Chief Secretary, Govt of A.P Dist.Collector E.G, Kakinada The Project Officer ITDA Rampachodavaram on behalf of Kunjam peda Abbayi Mulasala Sankuraiah (R4)	Relief Sought: Call for records relating to Appeal No.5/91 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the order in appeal No.5/91 dt.28-3-1992 passed by the 2nd respondent herein * Relief Granted: “**Writ petition is dismissed”.	Direction on 4.4.94 Disposed On : 04-Apr-1994
07. 5925/88 A.R.R.	Chepa Seetayamma Vs Avuri Peda Ramulu		W.A.Pending Disposed On : 16-Mar-1994
08. W.P.No.4661 of 1995 G.M. 81	Senapathi Apparao and 2 others. And Collector, kakinada and others	Relief Sought: pleased to order Stay of our eviction from the land measuring Ac.4.00 cents in S.No.26/3A and 26/33 of Pidathamamidi village, Gangavaram mandal, E.G.District.pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such further or other orders as may be deeded fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.	Filed on 10-03-1995 PENDING
09. Cr.P.632/95	K.Venkataram Chowdary Vs Ballem Pentanna dora & others(Tribals)	Impleaded	Pending tribal are in possession
10. SA 428/95 CMP 1465/95 A.R.R.	Maganti Denulu Vs Ganta Ganga & Borapa Venkateswarlu (Tribal)	Relief Granted:” Remanded to SDM Court, Rampa Chodavaram for fresh enquiry”.	Pending at SDM Court Rampachodavaram.
11. 14342/96	Chapa Seethayamma, Singampalli Vs Collector, Kakinada and others	Relief Granted: “The W.P. disposed of with a direction to pass appropriate order with in a period of four months”.	Disposed off in favour of tribals. Disposed On : 22-Jul-1996
12. W.P. No. 1133/89 C.M.A. No. 56/88 L.T.R. NO. 376/84 A.R.R.	Palli Ramulu (Non-tribal) Babbarapu Somalamma(NT) Vs Agent to Govt. (Dist. Collector)E.G Kakinada Deputy Collector, Rampachodavaram Special Deputy Tahsildar Rajavommangi. M.R.O. Rajavommangi, E.G Dist. Madiri.Lachannaa(Tribal)	Brief Note: This land belongs to Duvvula Bhimayya (tribe) who is maternal grand father of Madiri Latchanna (tribal) but non-tribal occupied this lands. SDC Court issued order in favour of Madiri Latchanna LTRP No.376/84 and CMA No.56/88 also went in his favour. The Non-tribal filed a writ petition in High Court. Relief Sought by the petitioner: For calling for the records relating to C.M.A No.56/88 of the file of the first respondent and quash the order dt.9-11-88 passed therein confirming the order of the 2nd respondent passed in LTRP No.376/84. *** Counter affidavit of the Madiri Lachanna (tribal) The respondents have correctly decided the issue as the burden of the land as on the date of the proceedings initiated under A.P.Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 1959 and the principle of res judicata does not apply to the beneficial provisions of the A.P.Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation.I also submit that section 3 of Regulaation ,1959 starts with non-obstants clause and hence the patta granted by the Settlement Officer is not binding on the authorities under theA.P.Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation.	filed on January 1989 counter of 5th respondent filed on March 95 case is pending. Madiri Latchanna, the tribal is cultivating the land Disposed On : 04-Dec-1996
13. W.P.No. 24712/95 LTRP No. 49/96 CMA No.50/91 CMA No.51/91 CMP No.53/91 A.R.R.	Vagu Sreerama chandra murthy Vagu. Venkateswara rao Vs 1.Collector, Kakinda 2.Dy. Collector Rampachodavaram 3.M.R.O Addateegala 4.Khambam Venkanna 5.Khambam Nukaraju(died) 6.Khambam Balaiah 7.Khambam Manikyam 8.Khambam Yesuratnam 9.Khambam Abbulu	Brief Note: the petition scheduled land registered in the name of Kambam Samayya from him the fatehr of the petitioner herein purchased in the year without agent to the government permission hence LTRPNo.49/90 filed by the tribals herein is the allowed aggrived by the said order non-tribal an appeal in CMA No.50/90 it was also dismissed on that this writ petition filed and got obtained the stay order in WPMP No.30438/95 on that W.V.MP.No.2869/96 stay vacate petition filed. Relief Sought: to grant stay of our eviction from the land measuring Ac,1.25 cents in S.No.9/7 of Gondolu village Addateegala mandal * Relief Granted:** “dismissed as the remedy of revision is available to the petitioners.”	Filed on 19-10-95 Disposed on 29-12-96
14. WPNo 23065/95 LTRP No.48/95 CMA 50/91 A.R.R.	Vagu Sreeramachandra murthy Vagu. Venkateswara rao Vs 1.Collector Kakinada 2.Deputy Collector Rampachodavaram 3.M.R.O.Addateegala 4.Khambam Aran 5.Khambam Mosu 6.Khambam Bhagyamma 7.Khambam Nagaraju	Brief Note: the petition scheduled land registered in the name of Kambam Samayya from him the petitioner herein said have been purchaged in the year 1932 the permission was not obtained. Inturn leased out the land to Gonney Baburao hence LTRP no.48/95 is allowed. Aggrived by the order file appeal CMA No. 51/91 the same was also dismissed. On that this petition was filed. Relief Sought:to grant stay of our eviction from te land measuring Ac.1.25 in S.No.9/7 of Gondolu Village Addateegala mandal,E.G Dist. Relief Granted: “dismissed as the remedy of revision is available to the petitioners”.	Filed on 11-10-95 Direction on 29-12-96
15. WPMP No.11605/95 WPMVP /95 A.R.R.	Kalumukota Nookaraju Kalumukota Nookaraju Vs 1.Dist.Collector 2.The Project office I.T.D.A 3.LolabhattaVenkata Raju	*Relief Sought:* (WPMP.11605/95) To implead the petitioner as 3rd respondent.	Filed on March1995 impleaded on 8-4-96 It is Pending
16. C.SS & LR's Case No.L3/1140/92,Dt.12.09.1997	Between: Sri Badireddi Tatarao, S/o Nukaraju,. Smt.Badireddi Simhachalam, W/o. Nukaraju ... Appellants. AND Project Officer, I.T.D.A., R.Chodavram. Kichela Lakshmayya (died) S/o. Nukayya Per L.Rs. 1. Ammanna (wife) 2. K.Surya Rao (son) 3. K.Chanda Rao (son) 4. K.Somalingam (son) 5. K.Nookaraju (son) ... Respondents. s	Relief Granted: The purported receipts do not indicate the S.Nos., or local names of the land in respect of which the payment is accepted. The same claimants who stated before the Spl.Dy.Tahsildar, and Special Tahsildar that they have no lease documents or receipts with them in support of their claims produced the same before the S.O., bearing tell-tale evidence in both cases of over-writing against Eksala entry and interpolation of the date in the first case. The S.O., did not verify the relevant Estate/Village Records nor the claimants produced the certified copies there of before the Collector or this Court which leads to one to believe that the documents produced are false and created for getting patta.	Case material
17. 9044/97 A.R.R.	Datla Venkatapathi raju, Rajavommangi Vs The Govt. of A.P. and 3 others	Relief Granted: “WP disposed of with a direction to the secretary to Govt. to issued fresh notice on disposed of the case with in weeks from the date of and GOMS. No. 47, dt. 17.4. 97”.	Writ petition pending Disposed On : 30-Apr-1997
18. 4 W.PNo. 7703/89 LTRP No.18/89 CMA No.44/89 A.R.R.	Smt.Padala Gani raju Padala Jaggayya Padala Veereswara rao Padala Veerabhadra rao Anantha Mangaratnam Vs The Dy.Collector T.W., E.G.Dist. The M.R.O. Addateegala Parsika Pakeeru (tribal)	Brief Note: In 1933 RSR the plaint schedule lands are registered in the name of Parisika Pakeeru (tribal) but this lands under possession and enjoyment of Non-tribals petitioner herein the possession of the non-tribal are void under agency regulation as such LTRP No.18/89 filed by Parisika Pakeeru is allowed agrived by the said order this petition is filed by non-tribals. On 6.3.95 Legal Heir petition filed by Parisika Parvathamma after death of Parisika Pakeeru. Note: In election petition O.P.No.2/87 decided that Padala family belongs to Kapu community. . Relief Sought: calling for the records relating to LTRP No.18/89, examine the same and quash the same as highly illegal, arbitrary, high-handed, biased and void	Filed on 11-6-1989. Judgement was given with a direction to SDC Disposed On : 27-Nov-1997
19. 18453/88 LTRP NO. 196/88 A.R.R.	1.Maganti Satyanarayana 2.Maganti Venkatarao Vs Deputy Collector(T.W) Rampachodavaram,E.G. M.R.O. Gangavaram mandal,E.G Pamarthi Krishna	Brief Note: Originally this land belongs to grand father of Pamarthi Krishna LTR Order is given in favour of tribal in LTRP No.196/88 aggrived by the said order. Non-tribals file this writ petition. Relief Sought: to stay dispossession to the petitioners from their land measuring Ac.10-98 in S.No.14/1, 3 and 4 of Patharamavaram village,Gangavaram mandal, E.G.Dist. *** The apprehension is only imaginary.Hence the writ petition is a premature one. If no enquiry is conducted into the complaints of the tribal petitioners the very purpose of establishing the Special Tribunal is defeated and the tribal will be put to a great loss. All the non-tribals who have acquired lands in the Agency area approaching the H.Court at the enquiry stage of the L.T.R.Ps and obtained stay orders by misrepresenting the facts to the Hon’ble H.Court and the officers appointed under L.T.R are being prevented from exercising their statutory powers enjoined under law. The plea of the writ petitioners that the earlier judgement in the L.T.R.P case operates as resjudicata is not tenable. The Hon’ble H.Court of Andhra Pradesh in its judgement dt.21-12-85 in W.P. 6065/79 observed that the mere fact that on the earlier occasion it was dismissed does not confer any right on the petitioner so long as the statutory order subsists (viz) the void sale subsists.	Filed on 9-12-88. It is Pending Disposed On : 06-Mar-1998
20. Cr.P.No. 399/98 A.R.R.	1.Pallala Subba Reddy 2.Gorle Raghavendram 3.Gaduturi Chinna rao 4.Kanagala Ramulamma 5.poleji Samayya Vs 1.The Agent to Govt. E.G, Kakinada 2.Dokkuluri Karnaiah 3.Karam Appanna Dora 4.Vindela Samayya	Relief Sought: memoramdum of grounds of Civil Revision Petition against the proceedings in O.S.No.16/97 on file of the 1st respondent The inaction of the 1st respondent is illegal and contrary to law.	Filed on February 1998 Remanded to Dist. Collector Disposed in favour of petitioner Disposed On : 04-Feb-1998
21. 15535/91 WPMP 19843/91 K.S.M.	R.M.Yerram Raju, Vs Govt. of A.P rep. by its Secretary M.R.O.,Gangavaram Sub-collector, Rampachodavaram	Brief Note: Nellipudi and Kurambondi villages of Gangavarma mandal are Mukhasa villages. Petitioner herein is sanda to Mukhasa villages. Mukhasa and Muttas are abolish under regulation 2 of 1969 the government issued the notice to petitioners as per GOMSNo.855 Dt.29.6.91 to handover the lands. As per our cases concerned grand father of Patara Gangaraju and Patara Vasarao (tribals) of Chinmpalem cultivated this land by podu cultivation. Hence implead petition filed. Relief Sought: to quash the G.O.M.S.No. 855-Revenue Departjment dt.26-9-1991 issued by the Govt. of A.P,Hyd. And for a consequential direction, directing the Respondents herein not to interfere with the uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s village. * Relief Granted:** “The fact remains that there is no land whatever granted recognizing him as the Mokhaadar. It is submitted by the respondent that even as on today, no document whatsoever are made available by the yarram raju(petitioner) claiming to be the mokhaadar. Under those circumstances, it is not possible for this court to uphold the plea put-forth by the petitioner herein claiming to be the mokhaadar . The other avertments made in the counter –affidavit challenging the very claim of the petitioner to be the mokhaadar, need not be referred. Suffice it to notice that the petitioner failed himself to establish that he is the mokhaadar. the then M.R.O Gangavaram took possession of the said village on 11.11.1991 and 12.11.1991.The petitioner is not in possession nor entitled to be in possession of the same. The W.P failed and accordingly stands dismissed.”	Filed on 23-11-91. Direction on 3.7.1999 Disposed On : 23-Jul-1999

22. 16273/92 A.R.R.	Datla Venkatapathi Raju, Vs Peppula Laxmi		for orders on 12.10.2000
23. WPMP. 16778 /98 In R.M.P.No. 9948 of 1999 in W.P. No. 13933/98 LTRP No.688/79 CMA 25/91 A.R.R.	Kalimikota Rajulamma Vs Datla Venkatapathi raju and others	Relief Sought: I submit that I am a scheduled tribe women fighting for the last 15 years for my land. The writ petitioner is a non-tribal who occupied vast extents of land and I am not able to fight against him due to lack of finances and knowledge of court proceedings. The above facts would have come to light had the government filed counter giving the particulars of the cases. I seek indulgence of this Hon’ble court for not being able to give full particulars of the cases when the above writ petition came up for orders on 12.02.1999. It is therefore just and necessary that this Hon’ble court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order in W.P.No.13933 of 1998. Otherwise I would suffer serious and irreparable loss.	Filed on April 1999 Disposed On : 17-Jul-2001
24. W.A.No.238/2000 in W.P.No.13933/98	The Special Deputy Collector (TW), Rampachodavaram, E.G.Dist. The S.D.T., TW, Rajavommangi, E.G. The M.R.O., Rajavommangi, E.G. And Datla Venkatrapasthi Raju r/o.Lakshminaraspuram, Anaparthi, E.G. Kalimkota Rajulamma r/o. Rajavommangi, E.G. Cheedipalli Tutayya r/o.Rajavommangi, E.G. (r-3 herein is not necessary party)	Relief Granted: “In the result and for the foregoing reasons. We cannot sustain the order of the learned single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed and the order of the learned single Judge dated 12.2.1999 is set aside and Writ Petition No.13933 of 1998 is dismissed with no order as to coss. As a consequence thereof. It is now oppen to the Spl.Dy.Collector (TW), Rampachodavara, the 1st appellant herein to take further steps pursuasnt to the notice in Form E issued to the 1st respondent under ~~Rule 7(2) of the Rules, in accordance with law.	Order Dated: 13-06-2002 Disposed On : 13-Jun-2002
25. 15619/94 LTRP No.s 467/84 250/88 244/88 248/88 A.R.R.	Bantupalli Appa Rao, Vs The Collector E.G.Dist. Kakinada Mulasala Sankuraiah (Tribal)	Brief Note: the Petitioners reagitated the matter that is already dismissed by this Hon’ble court in W.P.No.5079/92 & 5630/92. Relief Sought: to call for the records relating to the order in A.S.No.3/91 on the file of the respondents herein and quash the order in A.S.No.3/91 dt.21-3-92 passed by the respondent. *** Implead petition of Mulasa Sankuraiah filed on March 1994	Filed on 18-8-94. It is Pending. Disposed On : 25-Mar-2004
26. W.P.No.2527 of 2003 W.P.M.P.3315 of 2003. 84	Chodi Narasanna Dora Vs. The Dist. Collector The Revenue Div.officer, And 3 others	Relief Sought: to direct the authorities to immediately construct houses for the petitioner along with ogther similarly placed persons in Kothada village, Gangavaram mandal, residing in chodi veedhi and Tekula veedhi while considerin the representation submitted by the petitioner on 6.11.2002. and other villagers, pending W.P.No.2527 of 2003 on the file of the High Court. Relief Granted: The court while directing issue of notrice to the Respondents herein to show cause why this application should not be complied with made the following order. (Receipt of the order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the case).	Order Date: 10-02-2003. Disposed On : 02-Apr-2004
27. 15927/94 A.R.R.	LolabhattaVenkata Raju Vs Dist.Collector	Brief Note: the Petitioners reagitated the matter that is already dismissed by this Hon’ble court in W.P.No.5079/92 & 5630/92. Relief Sought:(W.P.15927/94): to call for the records relating to the order in A.S.No.5/91 on the file of the respondent herein and quash the order in A.S.No. 5/91 dt 28-3-1992 passed by the respondent.	Filed on 10-8-1994. Disposed On : 25-Mar-2004
28. 16559/91 A.R.R.	Datla Venkatapathi Raju Vs Cheja Mallaiah		Disposed On : 02-Sep-2004 Order Details

28.
1644/92
A.R.R.

Datla Venkatapathi raju,
Vs
Jerugudu Pondaiah

Disposed On : 02-Sep-2004

ORDERS

29.
9316/94
A.R.R.

Karukonda Naga Raju
Vs

The Agent to Govt. and the Dist. Collector
The Deputy Collector E.G., Kakinada
The M.R.O. Addateegala
Parsika Pakeeru

Brief Note: Originally this land belongs to Parsika Bullodu who is father of the respondent herein he sold the lands to non-tribals this transcation took place without the permission of the agent to government hence LTRP NO.60/90 filed by respondent herein is allosed. Agrived by the order petitioner herein preferred an appeal before agent to government in CMA No.31/91 it is also dismissed. On that he file the writ petition and got stay order in W.P.M.P.No.11375/94 stating that he belongs to Kondakapu caste.

Relief Sought: Declaring that the Judgement of the 1st respondent in C.M.A No.31/91 dt 19-10-1993 confirming the orders of the 2nd respondent in L.T.R.P.No.60/90 dt. 19-2-91 as highly illegal, unjust and void and consequently set aside the same.

Order wordfile

Filed on 9-5-1994.
Pending

Disposed On : 02-Sep-2004

ORDER DETAILS

30.
W.P.No.
5559/92
A.R.R.

Detla Venkatapathi Raju
Vs
T.Balayya

Disposed On : 02-Sep-2004

ORDER DETAILS

31.
WPNo.
5250/96

LTRP No. 186/78
C.M.A.81/80
A.R.R.

Ballula Veeraswamy
Vs

The agent to Govt. Kakinada
The Depy. Collector(T.W) Rampachodavaram
Yellapalli Veerabhadra rao

Vakalat filed

Pending

Disposed On : 24-Oct-2005

32.
10660/96
WPMP 12959
LTRP No.2/91
CMA No. 30/95
CMP No.
25/95
A.R.R.

Koppu Rajulu
Vs

Agent to Government, E.G.Dt, Kakinada
Spl. Dy. Collector(TW), Rampachodavaram,
Gollapalli Narasimha Murthy
Revula Sundara Rao
Sreepuri Nema Venkateswarlu
Sreepuri Raja Rao.

Brief Note: regarding survey No.53/1 is stands registered in the name of Koppu Rajappa who is grand father of Rajulu but the land is in the possession and enjoyment of Gollapalli narasimhamurthy who is a non-tribal. The SDC court in LTRP NO.2/91 held that Koppu Rajulu is belongs to Mala community. Hence the transaction held in this case was not void. But the predecessors of same court in LTRP no.179/80 observed that Koppu Rajulu is belongs to Valmiki (ST) aggrived by the order in LTRP No.2/91 prefere an appeal No. 30/95 before Agent to govt. The same was dismissed. Stating that he failed to explain delay infiling appeal on that this petition filed.

Relief Sought: calling for the records relating to C.M.P No. 20/95 in C.MA.No. 30/95 dt. 18-12-1995 passed by the first respondent and quash the same as illegal and viod consequently direct the first respondent to take up the appeal filed by petitioner on file and dispose of the same in accordance with law

filed on April 1996

It is pending

Disposed On : 27-Feb-2006

ORDER DETAILS

33.
W.P.No.19226/05
Rajavommangi case
K.S.M.
77

Vadiyala Lakshmaiah
Vadiyala Suribabu

Rajavommangi
Vs.
1. The Dist.Collector
2. Spl.Dy.Collector
3. M.Pedanookaraju
murlavanipalem,

Relief Sought: Declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in not ordering eviction of the R3 from all the land in Survey No.354/2 extending up to Ac.13.17 in Rajavommangi, Rajavommangi mandal, E.G.District as unconstitutional and consequently declare that no govt. land can be allowed to be in the possession of the non-tribal and consequently set aside that part of the final order of R1 in CMA No.7/98 wehich permits the R3 to retain the Ac.6.00 in Survey No. 354/2 in Rajavommangi, Rajavommangi mandal, E.G.Dist and pass such order or other orders as deemed fit in the interest of justice.

Filed on 29-08-05

Disposed On : 30-Aug-2007

Order

34.
WP No. 8737/92
A.R.R.

K.Lakshmidevi
Kondaka Gangadhara Rama Rao

Government of A.P. rep. by its Secretary
Dist. Collector E.G.
Project officer I.T.D.A. Rampachodavaram
Settlement officer, Visakhapatnam
Cheedikota Chitukulayya
Gangigedda Laxmamma

Brief Note: Petitioner herein obtained settlement patta the same was cancelled (Director of Settlement) aggrived by the said order she filed a writ petition and obtained interim stay in W.P.No.10794/92.
Relief Sought: Call for the records relating to A.P. No.159/90 and 19/92 and quash the same declaring that G.O.Ms No. 741 Revenue Dept. dt.9-8-1990 conferring powers under Sec. 4(4) and Sec. 9 of A.P.Muttas (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Regulation, 1969, on the second respondent is grossly illegal and unenforceable.
***
Relief Granted: “ordered that the operation of the order of the first respondent herein passed in A.P.No.159/90 and 19/92 on the file of the 1st respondent herein, be and hereby is suspended, pending further orders on this petition” .

Filed on 14-7-92

Direction on 14-07-92.

Disposed On : 25-Aug-2009

ORDER DETAILS

35.
WP No. 5188/92
WPMP 6981/95
A.R.R.

Peta Ramulu and others
Vs
Mandapati Lakshmi or others

impleaded.
Vacate stay petition filed.

Disposed On : 01-Jul-2009

36.

W.P.No. 20998 of 2007

Between:

Chikkala Rupavathi @ Satyavathi, W/o. Kamaraju, ..... PETITIONER

AND

1.The Additional Agent to Government,East Godavari District, Ramapachodavaram.
2.The Special Deputy Collector(Tribal Welfare) Rampachodavaram, East Godavari

District.
3.The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajavommangi, East Godavari District.
4.Tadikonda Bhulakshmi, W/o. Nageswara Rao, R/o.Jaddangi Village,

Rajavommangi Mandal, East Godavari District.
5.Shakti Voluntary Organization, Rep. by its Director Shiva Rama Krishna,
Ramapchodavaram, East Godavari District.
6.The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Social

Welfare Department, Secretariat, at Hyderabad.

Relief Sought : The petitioner in W.P.No.20998 of 2007 was in possession and enjoyment of Acs.2.64 cents of land in Survey No.241/3 of Jaddangi Village of Rajavommangi Mandal in East Godavari District. Respondents 4 and 5 therein approached the Special Deputy Collector (Tribal Welfare), Rampachodavaram – the 2nd respondent herein, by filing L.T.R.P.No.150 of 2002 for eviction of petitioner from the land. The 2nd respondent dismissed the L.T.R.P. through order dated 22.02.2002. Aggrieved thereby, respondents 4 and 5 filed C.M.A.No.49 of 2005 before the Additional Agent to the Government, Rampachodavaram – the 1st respondent herein. The appeal was allowed on 06.01.2007. The petitioner states that though two months time is stipulated for filing revision before the Government, the Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajavommangi – the 3rd respondent herein evicted her on 07.01.2007 itself. She contends that such an action is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, apart from being contrary to the A.P. Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Rules, 1969 (‘the Rules, for brevity).

Relief Granted : Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the revisional authority i.e. the Government to dispose of the revisions filed by the petitioners within six (06) weeks from today. In case the revisions filed by the petitioners are not disposed of despite the petitioners being ready to cooperate, the 1st respondent in all the writ petitions, i.e., the Additional Agent to the Government, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District shall be under the obligation to re-induct the petitioners into possession of the land, duly issuing notices to the effected parties. There shall be no order as to costs.

Order

Case details

Land rights - EAST GODAVARI

Petitioners & Respondents

Between:

AND