PITTA NAVEEN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, wherein the following prayer is made: "...to pass an order or orders or writ particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3rd respondent in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the land in Sy No 17/4B admeasuring to an extent of Ac.1.67 cents of agriculture Land situated at Peddanallaballi Village, Dummugudem Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District while Appeal and Stay Application U/S 10 of T.S.Land Encroachment Act, 1905, vide I A No. of 2020 in Rs.E Appeal of 2020 against the order dated 21.8.2020 of the 3rd respondent is pending before the 2nd respondent as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of T.S.Land Encroachment Act, 1905 against the principles of natural justice and violation of the Petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to dispossess the petitioner from subject land pending Stay Application and Appeal before 2nd respondent and pass such other order or orders "

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that aggrieved by the proceedings, dated 21.08.2020, passed by the 3rd respondent, the Tahsildar, Dummugudem Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, in Rc.No.B/420/2020 directing eviction of the petitioner from the subject land admeasuring Acs.1.67 guntas in Survey No.17/4B situated at Peddanallaballi Village, Dummugudem Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 10 of the T.S.Land Encroachment Act, 1905, along with an interlocutory application (stay petition), before the 2nd respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. Neither the said appeal, nor the stay petition in the said appeal are disposed of by the 2nd respondent and ultimately sought a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the stay petition in the said appeal at the first instance and thereafter, dispose of the appeal expeditiously.