MD ABDUL GAFFAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner filed the instant writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the District Collector, hyderabad and the Mandal Revenue Officer, khairatabad Mandal (MRO), to remove the board erected in/near petitioner's premises bearing House No. 8-3-937, Yellareddyguda, hyderabad.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances leading to filing of this writ petition in brief are as follows. The property admeasuring 1277 Sq. yards in premises No. 8-3-937 with compound wall is owned by Md. Ibrahim, the grandfather of petitioner. The tax is also being paid to Municipal Corporation of hyderabad (MCH) in his name. Sometime in 1950, the premises was leased out to department of Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh for running a primary school. The rents were paid to the petitioner. In 1980, petitioner filed a rent control case being R. C. No. 180 of 1980 on the file of the Court of II Additional Rent Controller, hyderabad, for eviction. By an order dated 6. 5. 1981, learned Rent Controller ordered eviction of the tenant, namely, District educational Officer, Hyderabad. In obedience thereto, the tenant delivered possession to the petitioner, who is continuing in possession.

(3.) IN 1981, Government issued notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land acquisition Act, 1894 (the LA Act, for brevity) proposing to acquire the premises. The petitioner challenged the same in W. P. No. 119 of 1982. The same was dismissed on 24. 3. 1982 aggrieved by which the petitioner filed writ appeal being W. A. No. 312 of 1982, which was dismissed on 22. 4. 1982 as the notification under Section 4 (1) of LA Act lapsed. Throughout pendency of writ proceedings, there was stay of delivery of possession. Be that as it is, Government issued yet another notification under Section 4 (1) of LA Act on 26. 7. 1989. This was subject-matter of w. P. No. 12732 of 1989 in which this Court passed an order dated 19. 2. 1990 staying dispossession observing that all other proceedings may go on. Subsequently said writ petition was dismissed on 15. 4. 1993 observing the Land Acquisition Officer may conduct enquiry under Section 5 (1) of LA act and determine whether the proceedings should be dropped or not. Thereafter no award was passed.