2011 (1) ALT 667 (D.B.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
A.GOPAL REDDY and P. DURGA PRASAD, JJ.
State of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary, Hyderabad and others
v.
M/s. J.K. Traders of Ramakrishna 70 MM Theatre, NTR Estates, Hyderabad rep. by its Proprietor N. Jayakrishna
W.A.Nos.1407 of 2000 and 1175 of 2010
Decided on 31-12-2010
B) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, Schedule VII, List II, Entry 1 :- Public order mentioned herein is not only peace, tranquility and public order, with respect to persons, but also their property. (Para 36)
C) HYDERABAD CITY POLICE ACT, 1348F, Sections 22, 23 and 26:- Prevention of any riots, violence and destruction of private property is the statutory duty of the police commissioner. (Para 33)
D) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, Article 21 – Petitioner seeking compensation for the loss of property shall prove that it affect his livelihood. Life and livelihood are relative terms depending upon the circumstances of the cases. (Paras 54 to 56)
WA No.1407/2000 under Cl.15 of the Letters Patent by (1) State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad; (2) District Collector and District Magistrate, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad and ,(3) Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, is directed against the judgment/order dt. 28-8-2000 allowing WP No.15050/1993 by the learned single Judge of this Court awarding compensation of one crore rupees for the damage of the property belonging to the writ petitioner on the aftermath of assassination of late Rajiv Gandhi.
2. To put very shortly, the essential admitted facts, which give rise to filing of the writ petition, are thus:
On the wide spread news about assassination of late Rajiv Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of this country on 21-5-1991, large scale violence erupted throughout the country including in the State of Andhra Pradesh, and twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad on the night of 21-5-1991, 'where large scale destruction of property, private and public, in different parts of the State. On coming to know about the incident of assassination and since Sri NT Rama Rao was the leader of opposition, the Manager of Ahwanam Hotels, Mr. Ramanaiah expressing fear of possibility of some attack on NTR Estates at Abids reported to the police of Abids Police Station for providing necessary protection to safeguard the properties. According to the Commissioner of police-third respondent, Inspector of Police, Abids Police Station informed about the non-availability of police force at the police station, but around 23-30 hours, the then Commissioner of Police instructed Ramesh Kumar, S.I. of Abids Police Station to deploy police force 'at the house of Sri N.T.Rama Rao and also at N.T.R. Estates, Abids. Accordingly, police picket was posted at the residence of Sri N.T. Rama Rao at Abids. According to the petitioner, the police could not move in the matter and delayed the steps to be taken to protect the interests of NTR Estates including Ramakrishna 70 MM theatre. In the meanwhile, about 150 persons had gathered outside the theatre and while they were making attempts to enter into the N.T.R. Estates, Ramanaiah, Manager of Ahwanam Hotel passed on the information to various persons but could not receive any help from anyone especially from the police. Even police who came to the spot did not take steps to prevent the damage to N.T.R. Estates and played a second fiddle to the men in power and the mob gathered there who were belonging to the Congress Party workers caused extensive damage to the theatre. The police did not take any positive action to prevent from causing damage to the theatre though it could have been possible. After the damage was caused, the Commissioner of Police deputed one Mr. Siva Shanker, Additional Commissioner of Police to enquire into the situation leading to the damage of the theatre. He conducted personal enquiry and submitted his report finding the police officers guilty of dereliction of duties and they have irresponsibly behaved in preventing the property in question. The Government of Andhra Pradesh appointed a Commission of Inquiry under Section 3 of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 consisting of a single member viz., Sri Justice M.R.A.Ansari, a retired Chef Justice of Jammu & Kashmir High Court, through G.O.Ms.No.511, General Administration (GenI.B) Department dt. 22-8-1991 as one-Man Commission to enquire into the widespread incidents of violence involving destruction of properties occurred in several places in Andhra Pradesh following the assassination of Sri Rajiv Gandhi in Tamil Nadu on the night of 21-5-1001. The Commission submitted its report to the Government on 20-6-1992 with its findings in terms of the reference made to it. One Man Commission found that the violent reaction did not lead to attack on public property as generally happened but to attack on private property belonging to the members of the opposition parties i
Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India: (1999) 6 SCC 667. (Para 11)
Sube Singh v. State of Haryana: 2006 (2) ALT (Cd.) 123 (SC) = 2006 (3) SCJ 754. (Para 11)
M. S. Grewal v. Deep Chand: 2001 (2) An W.R. 568 (SC) = (2001) 8 SCC 151. (Para 11)
Nilabati Bahera v. State of Orissa: (1993) 2 SCC 746 = AIR 1993 SC 1960. (Para 12)
Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India: (1995) 3 SCC 42
Lucknow Development Authority v. M. K. Gupta: (1994) 1 SCC 243. (Para 13)
D. K. Basu v. State of West Bengal: (1997) 1 SCC 416. (Para 13)
National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh: (1996) 1 SCC 742. (Para 13)
R. Gandhi v. Union of India AIR 1989 Mad. 205. (para 13)
M/S. Inderpuri General Store v. Udi: AIR 1992 J&K 11. (Para 13)
Waf Alalaulad v. M/s.sunderdas Doulatram: AIR 1996 ALL. 355. (Para 13)
S.S. Ahluwalia v. Union of India: (2001) 4 SCC 452. (Para 13)
Volga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation: AIR 1986 SC 180. (Para 13)
State of A.P. v. Challa Ramakrishna Reddy: (2000) 5 SCC 712. (Para 40)
Sri Lakshmi Agencies v. Government of Andhra Pradesh: 1994 (1) ALT 341. (Para 48)
New Reviera Co or Housing Society v.Special Land Acquisition Officer: (1996) 1 SCC 731. (Para 55)
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited v. Union of India: (1996) 10 SCC 104. (Para 55)
gpt-4
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.