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

2013 Supreme(AP) 877

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Ch. Gopinath – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Visakhapatnam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.S. Bhatt, Counsel for the Petitioner; AGP for Revenue, Counsel for the Respondents.

ORDER

The woes of the petitioner, an Ex-Serviceman (retired as Leading Seaman (CD-3) in Indian Navy) appeared to have started with his securing an assignment in respect of Ac.1.73 cents of dry land in Survey No. 143/4 of Paradesipalem, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal in the year 1989.

2. The petitioner approached respondent No. 3 time and again for mutation of his name in the record of rights. As his request was not heeded to by the subordinate officials, he has approached respondent No.1 who vide his order, dated 3.5.2005, directed respondent No.3 to take necessary steps on the petitioner's request. As there was no response to the petitioner's request even thereafter, he has filed WP No. 24217 of 2006. The writ petition was initially dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court by order, dated 29.11.2006. WA No. 11 of 2007 filed against the said order was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court by order, dated 4.1.2007, and the case was remanded to the learned Single Judge for fresh disposal.

3. In the said writ petition, respondent No. 3 filed a counter-affidavit on behalf of the official respondents, wherein it was inter alia stated that Paradesipalem Village was an estate vill









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