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

1984 Supreme(AP) 237

A.SEETHARAM REDDY, V.MADHAVA RAO
V. Sudharshan Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Government of A P. Revenue – Respondent


MADHAVA RAO, J.

( 1 ) ALL these writ petitions have been taken up together as the point involved is common.

( 2 ) THE main point raised in this batch of writ petitions is that the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh (1st respondent) had ho jurisdiction to issue Memo. No. 1439-UC. 1/80-2dt. 10-12-1980 to the inspector General of Registration and stamps directing issuance of instructions to all the registering authorities not to entertain registration of agricultural lands which are specified in the master plan for a purpose other than agricultural based on the certificates issued by the Special officer and Competent Authority, Urban land Ceiling, Hyderabad, since those previous certificates are invalid after the new master plan came into force and to insist upon permission of the Special officer and Competent Authority under section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter called urbun Ceiling Act ) or exemption from the Government if the extent of land exceeds 1000 square meters.

( 3 ) TO appreciate the above point, it is sufficient to note the facts stated in the affidavit filed in support of writ petition No. 6542 of 1980. The respondent is one, M Abdul Hameed. H

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