Kolletikota, Kaikalur v. Kaikalur
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 s. 18
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 144, 145
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Dated: 22-12-2004. P.S. NARAYANA, J Ccm __________________ To: 1 The District Collector , Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kaikalur Mandal, Krishna District. 3 2 CCs to the Government Pleader…
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 may be pleased to issue an Appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kaikaluru, the second respondent herein R.C.A.No.242/97, dt.17.3.1997 as illegal, and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the Agricultural activity by repairing bunds of the petitioner society in the lands of an extent of Ac.50.00 in Survey Nos.431 to 445 situated in Pandiripalligudem, H/o. Kolletikota Village, Kaikalur Mandal, Krishna District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.P.V.SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following :
O R D E R:
The present Writ Petition is filed for a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Kaikaluru-second respondent herein in R.C.A.No.242 of 1997, dated
17.03.1997 as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the agricultural activity by repairing bunds of the petitioner-society in the lands in an extent of Ac.50-00 in Survey Nos.431 to 445 situated in Pandiripalligudem, hamlet of Kolletikota village, Kaikalur Mandal, Krishna District and to pass such other suitable orders.
Several averments were made in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. A notification issued under Section 18 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 also had been referred to and issuance of orders not to excavate and convert government lands into fish tanks also had been specified. It is also stated that the proceedings under Sections 144 and 145 of Criminal Procedure Code had been made without notice to the petitioner.
In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, inasmuch as several factual aspects had been narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the petitioner’s Society is given liberty to make a representation to the first respondent in this regard within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the first respondent shall dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter.
Operative part
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Dated: 22-12-2004. P.S. NARAYANA, J Ccm __________________ To: 1 The District Collector , Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kaikalur Mandal, Krishna District. 3 2 CCs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, A.P.Hyderabad. (OUT) 4 2 CD copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 — s. 18; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 144, 145.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Dec 2004. The bench was P S NARAYANA.
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.