SRINIVASA FERTILIZERS Vs. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Limited, 2nd respondent, in the present writ petition, in short referred to as "Corporation" moved W.V.M.P. No.3625/2004 in W.P.M.P. No.23677/1997 praying for vacation of the interim direction dated 19-8-1997 and at the time of hearing of the vacate application, with the consent of the Counsel on record, the writ petition itself is being finally disposed of.

(2.) Sri P. Rajam Raju, Counsel representing the writ petitioner after taking this Court through the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition maintained that in view of the fact that a decree had been obtained in O.S. No. 153/87 on the file of I Additional Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari for recovery of amount, the same can be put into execution by the 2nd respondent-Corporation and hence the impugned proceeding of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District, 1st respondent herein, in Reference C.No.242/ 97, dated 17-7-1997, cannot be sustained. The learned Counsel also pointed out several of the factual aspects. The learned Counsel also submitted that the condition imposed while granting interim order had been complied with.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader for Revenue had submitted that in view of the fact that the amount due to the Corporation can be recovered not only by putting the decree into execution but also by invoking Section 52-A of the A.P. Revenue Recovery Act, 1864, hereinafter in short referred to as "R.R. Act" by the Corporation by virtue of G.O. Ms. No.891, Revenue (N) Department, dated 24-6-1982, the impugned action cannot be found fault in any way. The learned Government Pleader also maintained that recovery proceeding cannot be held to be without jurisdiction merely because yet another mode by way of putting the decree into execution is available.