✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 24 Nov 2005

Ettaiah v. The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally, Hyderabad & Anr.

Writ Petition No. 24937 of 2005V V S RAO

Case at a glance

Decided
24 Nov 2005
Bench
V V S RAO

Outcome

Disposed of

In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second

Judgment

Operative part

The petitioner is a resident of Ibrahimbagh Village, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad. It is his case that he has been in occupation of Government land admeasuring Acs.2.50 cents in Survey No.178 at Ibrahimbagh Village, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad, where he has been raising agricultural crops. In 1983, steps were initiated under the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, for eviction of the petitioner on the ground that the occupation of the land is objectionable. The petitioner approached the respondents requesting assignment of the land. He was allegedly informed that if the revenue records show his name as occupant of the land in Survey No.178, his case will be considered for assignment of land, if there is no prohibition for such assignment. Therefore, the petitioner approached the second respondent seeking certified copies of Pahanies from 1954 onwards. By memo, dated 21.02.2005, he was informed that Pahanies cannot be supplied to him as his name is not found in Column Nos.11 and 16 of the Pahanies. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the second respondent to furnish certified copies of Pahanies from 1954. At the stage of admission itself, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue obtained instructions and submits that in old Pahanies up to 1982, the petitioner’s name is shown as occupant in respect of Ac.0.20 guntas of land in Column No.35 in Survey No.178, which is shown to be Government Poramboke land. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to reconsider the request of the petitioner to furnish all the copies of the Pahanies wherever the petitioner’s name is shown as occupant/encroacher, on payment of usual charges. No costs. ____________

(V.V.S.RAO, J)

24.11.2005

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 24 Nov 2005. The bench was V V S RAO.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 24937 of 2005). ← Search more judgments