SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(AP) 708

A.R.LAKSHMANAN, GHULAM MOHAMMED
Sannepalli Nageswar Rao – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Khammam – Respondent


AR. LAKSHMANAN, C. J.

( 1 ) WE have heard Sri D. V. Sitarama Murthy for appellant, Sri Kowturu Vinay Kumar for respondent No. 4 and the Government Pleader for Revenue for Respondents 1 to 3.

( 2 ) THE writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court dated 21-2-2002 disposing of Writ Petition No. 3405 of 2002 filed by the appellants herein and directing the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to complete enquiry and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. Insofar as the contention raised by the appellants/writ petitioners that the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer has no right, authority or jurisdiction to conduct any enquiry is concerned, the learned single Judge left open that point to be raised before the same authority, viz. , Revenue Divisional Officer.

( 3 ) IN this case, according to the appellants, they are the pattadars, owners and possessors of Ac. 6. 21 guntas and Ac. 4. 20 guntas out of Survey No. 394/aa respectively situated at Gumpena village, Chandrugonda Mandal of Khammam District and their names are recorded as pattadars and possessors of the said la









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top