Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 14, 21, 226
- Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956 s. 52
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in issuing the Notice No.11199/J4/2001, dt.28-2-2005 as arbitrary, illegal and violaltive of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the said notice No.11199/J4/2001, dt.28.2.2005 and direct the respondent not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners house bearing H.No.16-1-738 admeasuring 170 Sq. Yards situated at Harizan Baswthi, Saidabad, Hyderabad and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.Y.SUDERSHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: MR.D.RANGANAT HA KUMAR T he Court made the following : T HE HON'BLE MR JUST ICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PET IT ION NO : 5606 of 2005
ORDER:
The case of the two petitioners, who seek invalidation of a notice, dated 28.02.2005, issued by the respondent, is as follows. The first petitioner purchased a house bearing Municipal No.16-1-138 admeasuring 170 square yards situated at Harizan Basthi, Saidabad, Hyderabad, under a registered sale deed, dated 13.05.1968. The second petitioner is the wife of first petitioner. They are in possession of the land. It appears, the first petitioner gifted the house to the second petitioner under a registered settlement/gift deed, dated 27.05.2000. Be that as it is, the respondent issued the notice alleging that the petitioners have encroached the land of Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (APHB) in an extent of 21.25 square yards and they were directed to remove the unauthorized encroachment. This Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for APHB. Section 52 of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956 (for short “the Act”) empowers the competent authority to conduct enquiry after issuing notice and order eviction of a person in unauthorized occupation of the land belong to APHB. In that view of the matter, this Court cannot find fault with the It shall be open to the petitioners to impugned notice. It is approach the respondent and submit explanation. needless to observe that unless due process of law provided for under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act is followed, the petitioners cannot be evicted from the premises/land in their possession. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
24.09.2008 GJ ____________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.