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

2023 Supreme(Online)(AP) 11075

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J
Rudram Surya Rao (Died) – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent


ORDER:

Heard Ms.Grandhi Priyanka, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V.V.Satish, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, Sri Shaik Umar Abdullah, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri S.V.S.S.Siva Ram, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No.5 and Ms. M.Rose, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Ld. Standing Counsel for ZPP, MPP and Gram Panchayat.

2. The prayer in the Writ is as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon‟ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or direction, declaring the highhanded action of the petitioner‟s shed and removed the coconut trees without following procedure of law under Land Encroachment Act or Panchayat Raj Act and without giving any notice to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of the Articles 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to demolish the structures and not to remove the coconut trees an extent of 1000 Square yards out of the total extent Ac.1-65 cents covered under R.S.No.523 of Chinakondepudi Village, Seethanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District and pass such other order or orders as the Ho

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