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

1988 Supreme(AP) 402

K.A.SWAMI
Gudimetla Narasimha murthy – Appellant
Versus
Director of Settlements, A. P. , gagan Viher IVth floor; M. J. Road, Hyderabad – Respondent


K. AMARESWARI, J.

( 1 ) THE 16 petitioners were granted pattas under Section 5 of the A. P. Muttas (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) regulation (Regulation II of 1969) by the settlement Officer, who is the competent authority under the Regulation. The petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment to lands. They applied for transit permits as there was forest growth in the land, in accordance with the provisions of chapter III-A of the A. P. Forests Act. The applications were made on 21-8-85. As the district Collector did not choose to act on the applications of the petitioners, W. P. No. 14272/85 was filed for a direction to issue transit permits. The said writ petition was resisted by the Divisional Forest officer, Kakinada who was one of the respondents therein, contending that the appeal against the order dated 2-2-1975 of the Settlement Officer granting pattas. is pending before the Director of Settlement and since the pattas themselves are under challenge, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. Basing on this statement, that writ petition was disposed of on 17-4-87 with a direction to the- Director of Settlement to dispose of the appeals pending before him w









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