As per case facts, petitioners, residents of Gunadala, Vijayawada, claimed long-term possession of property through ancestors, paying taxes. Respondent corporation sought to acquire this land for a railway over bridge, ...
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFANDHRAPRADESHATAMARAVATI
PRESENT
THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
WRITPETITIONNos.16316,16999,17291,17335,21257of2020,19431,
22273,22281of2021,3889of2022andCC.Nos.4939and4941of2023
+WRITPETITIONNO:16316/2020
%27.01.2026
Between:
1.THOTAVENKATADRI,S/o.T.ChinnaBasavaiah,agedabout71yaers,
R/o.D.No.49-1-35,BesideSivalayam,Gunadala,Vijayawada,1
st
New
AssessmentNo.1073145340,2
nd
NewAssessmentNo.1073145339and
others
...PETITIONERs
AND
1.THESTATEOFANDHRAPRADESH,REPBYITSPRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,MUNICIPALADMINISTRATION,SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI.
2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT,
MACHILIPATNAM,
3.VIJAYAWADAMUNICIPALCORPORATION,REPBYITS
COMMISSIONER,VIJAYAWADA,
4.THETAHSILDAR,VIJAYAWADA,NORTH,
5.THEEXECUTIVEENGINEER,RANDBDEPARTMENT,
VIJAYAWADA,KRIAHNADISTRICT.
6.THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERCUMSUBCOLLECTOR,
VIJAYAWADA,KRISHNADISTRICT R6ISIMPLEADEDASPER
THEORDEROFTHISCOURT,DT.20.09.2023,VIDEORDER
PASSEDINI.A.2OF2023.
...RESPONDENT(S):
CounselforthePetitioners:VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselforRespondents:
<Gist:
>HeadNote:
?Casesreferred:
1.2004(2)ALD451
2.WP.No.43730of2016andbatch,decidedon21.03.2025
ThisCourtmadethefollowing:
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
2
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFANDHRAPRADESHATAMARAVATI
PRESENT
THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
WRITPETITIONNos.16316,16999,17291,17335,21257of2020,19431,
22273,22281of2021,3889of2022andCC.Nos.4939and4941of2023
+WRITPETITIONNO:16316/2020
%27.01.2026
Between:
1.THOTAVENKATADRI,S/o.T.ChinnaBasavaiah,agedabout71yaers,
R/o.D.No.49-1-35,BesideSivalayam,Gunadala,Vijayawada,1
st
New
AssessmentNo.1073145340,2
nd
NewAssessmentNo.1073145339and
others
...PETITIONERs
AND
1.THESTATEOFANDHRAPRADESH,REPBYITSPRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,MUNICIPALADMINISTRATION,SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI.
2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT,
MACHILIPATNAM,
3.VIJAYAWADAMUNICIPALCORPORATION,REPBYITS
COMMISSIONER,VIJAYAWADA,
4.THETAHSILDAR,VIJAYAWADA,NORTH,
5.THEEXECUTIVEENGINEER,RANDBDEPARTMENT,
VIJAYAWADA,KRIAHNADISTRICT.
6.THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERCUMSUBCOLLECTOR,
VIJAYAWADA,KRISHNADISTRICT R6ISIMPLEADEDASPER
THEORDEROFTHISCOURT,DT.20.09.2023,VIDEORDER
PASSEDINI.A.2OF2023.
...RESPONDENT(S):
DATEOFCOMMONORDERPRONOUNCED:27.01.2026
SUBMITTEDFORAPPROVAL:
HON’BLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
1.WhetherReportersofLocalnewspapersmay
beallowedtoseetheJudgments? Yes/No
2.Whetherthecopiesofordermaybemarked
toLawReporters/Journals? Yes/No
3.WhetherYourLordshipswishtoseethefair
copyoftheorder?
Yes/No
____________________
JUSTICEHARINATH.N
3
APHC010248222020
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFANDHRAPRADESH
ATAMARAVATI
(SpecialOriginalJurisdiction)
[3457]
TUESDAY,THETWENTYSEVENTHDAYOFJANUARY
TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYSIX
PRESENT
THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
WRITPETITIONNos.16316,16999,17291,17335,21257of2020,19431,
22273,22281of2021,3889of2022andCC.Nos.4939and4941of2023
WP.No.16316/2020
Between:
ThotaVenkatadri ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
TheCourtmadethefollowing:
WP.No.16999/2020
Between:
Smt.KotaRajeswari,andOthers ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner(S):
1.VINEETHAPPASANI
2.VENKATSAILENDRAG
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.17291/2020
Between:
SriKolliJoyNikhilRaj, ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfApandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORROADSBUILDINGS
4
2.GPFORREVENUE
3.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
4.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.17335/2020
Between:
SriJettiSatyanarayana ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.21257/2020
Between:
SriPavuluriBharadwaj, ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.RAMINENISATISHBABU
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.19431/2021
Between:
SriVallabhaneniSaroja, ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.RAMINENISATISHBABU
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORROADSBUILDINGS
2.GPFORREVENUE
3.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
4.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.22273/2021
Between:
SriChelamkuriNagaraju, ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.RAMINENISATISHBABU
5
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORROADSBUILDINGS
2.GPFORREVENUE
3.MMANOHARREDDY(SCFORMUNCANDMUNCCORP)
4.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
5.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.22281/2021
Between:
SriVadranapuVenkateswaraRao, ...PETITIONER
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.RAMINENISATISHBABU
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
WP.No.3889/2022
Between:
JettiSivaandOthers ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
TheStateOfAndhraPradeshandOthers ...RESPONDENT(S)
CounselforthePetitioner(S):
1.VENKATSAILENDRAG
CounselfortheRespondent(S):
1.GPFORREVENUE
2.GPFORMUNCIPALADMNURBANDEV
3.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
CONTEMPTCASENO:4939/2023
Between:
SriJettiSatyanarayana, ...PETITIONER
AND
SriSwapnilDinkarIas ...CONTEMNOR
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselfortheContemnor:
1.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
CONTEMPTCASENo.4941/2023
Between:
SriKolliJoyNikhilRaj, ...PETITIONER
AND
SriSwapnilDinkarIas ...CONTEMNOR
6
CounselforthePetitioner:
1.VENKATESWARARAOGUDAPATI
CounselfortheContemnor:
1.S.V.S.S.SIVARAMSCForVMC
TheCourtmadethefollowing:
7
THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
WRITPETITIONNos.16316,16999,17291,17335,21257of2020,19431,
22273,22281of2021,3889of2022andCC.Nos.4939and4941of2023
COMMONORDER:
1.AllthepetitionersareresidentsoftheGunadalaarea,Vijayawadaand
havefiledabatchofwritpetitionsseekingtodeclaretheproceedings
dated04.07.2023issuedbytherespondentauthorityrejectingthe
requestofthewritpetitionersforthegrantofcompensationunderthe
RighttoFairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013.
2.Thepetitionersarealsoseekingadirectiontotherespondent
authoritiestoinitiateacquisitionproceedingsundertheRighttoFair
CompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,Rehabilitation
andResettlementAct,2013.Thepetitionersarealsoseekingpayment
ofcompensationintermsofAct,30of2013.Thelearnedcounsel
appearingforthepetitionerssubmitsthatthepetitionersarepermanent
residentsoftheGunadalaareainSy.No.284/4andthattheyacquired
thepropertythroughtheirancestors.Itissubmittedthatsomeofthe
petitioners’forefathershavebeenlivingthereforabout100yearsor
more.
3.ItisalsosubmittedthattheGunadalaareawasoriginallya
Grampanchayat,whichwasmergedintotheVijayawadaMunicipal
Corporationintheyear1981.Thereafter,thepetitioners'propertywas
assessedfortaxes,andtheyregularlypaidthepropertytax.Priorto
8
payingpropertytaxtotheVijayawadaMunicipalCorporation,the
petitionershadbeenpayingittotheGramPanchayat.
4.Asthingsstood,therespondentcorporationintendedtoacquirethe
propertyfortheconstructionofarailwayoverbridge(ROB),andthe
petitionerswereinformedthattheywereinoccupationofgovernment
landandrequiredtoevictfromthesaidland.Thepetitionerssubmitted
representationstotherespondentauthorities,dulyinformingthemthat
thepetitionersarelandlesspoorpeopleresidingonthesaidlandand
ekingouttheirlivelihoodbyrunningshopsthere.Evictingthemfrom
theirpropertywoulddeprivethepetitionersoftheirlivelihood.
5.Itissubmittedthatthepetitionersarenotagainstconstructionofthe
ROB,however,therespondentsoughttohaveconsideredthe
longstandingpossessionofthepetitionersoverthepropertysincetime
immemorial,theonlywaythepetitionerscouldbeevictedfromthesaid
propertyisbyacquiringthepropertyofthepetitionersbyinvokingthe
RighttoFairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013.
6.ThisCourt,videorderdated14.09.2020,directedtherespondent
authoritiestofollowdueprocessoflaw.Theprimarycontentionofthe
learnedcounselforthepetitionersisthatthepetitionersarethe
possessorsofthepropertyandresidinginthesaidpropertysincetime
immemorial.Section3(n)oftheRighttoFairCompensationand
TransparencyinLandAcquisition,RehabilitationandResettlementAct,
9
2013woulddefineholdingoflandasthetotallandheldbyapersonas
anowner,occupantortenantorotherwise.Thepetitionersclaimto
haveacquiredthepropertyfromtheirancestors,andtheyarealso
payingtaxesasassessedbytherespondentauthorities.Thepetitioners
arealsoissuedelectricityandmunicipalwaterconnections,assuch,the
occupationoflandbythepetitionerscannotbeconsideredas
encroachmentorillegaloccupation.
7.Thelearnedcounselforthepetitionerreliesonthejudgmentofthis
CourtinLAO-Cum-RDOVs.MekalaPanduandothers
1
.Itis
submittedthattheencroachersarealsoentitledtotheissuanceofa
notice,andtherespondentsareunderamoral,legal,andsocial
obligationtofollowdueprocessoflawinevictinganyencroacher.
8.Itisalsosubmittedthatthepetitionerscannotbeconsideredas
encroachersonaccountofthepetitioners'continuous,uninterrupted
andundisturbedpossessionandenjoymentofthepropertyformore
thanthelast100years.Itissubmittedthattherespondentsare
obligatedto,inessence,followtheRighttoFairCompensationand
TransparencyinLandAcquisition,RehabilitationandResettlementAct,
2013,fortakingoverthepropertyofthepetitioners.
9.TherespondentNo.3hasfiledadetailedcounter,andthelearned
standingcounselforthe3rdrespondentvehementlydisputesthe
petitioners'claimofownershipovertheproperty.Itissubmittedthatthe
1
2004(2)ALD451
10
petitionershave,sofar,notproducedanytitledocument,deed,ororder
thatentitlesthemtoclaimownership.Itissubmittedthatsomeofthe
petitionersclaimtohavepurchasedthepropertybywayofan
unregisteredagreementofsale.
10.Itissubmittedthattheassessmentofthepropertyfortaxandthe
paymentofthesaidtaxwouldnotconferanyvalid,legal,ortransferable
title.So,also,paymentofelectricityandmunicipalwaterbillsdoesnot
conferanyexclusiverightoftitle.Itissubmittedthattheprovisionsof
theRighttoFairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013,cannotbeinvokedfor
evictingtheencroachers.
11.Itisalsosubmittedthattherespondentauthorities,incompliancewith
theinterimordersdated14.09.2020,haveissuednoticestoall
concernedforevictingthem.Itisalsosubmittedthatthenecessityfor
theconstructionofarailwayoverbridgewasnecessitatedtoeasethe
growingtrafficinVijayawada.Thesaidprojectisundertakeninthe
publicinterestandforpublicuse.
12.ThepropertyoccupiedbythepetitionersisGovernmentporamboke
land,andnoneofthepetitionersweregrantedanypattacertificatesto
claimanylegalrightoverthesame.Itisalsosubmittedthat,on
humanitariangrounds,therespondentcorporationofferedhousingto
theevacuees.
11
13.TherespondentNo.4hasalsofiledacounter,andthelearnedAssistant
GovernmentPleaderforthestatesubmitsthattheprocessof
acquisitionoflandfortheconstructionoftheROBwascompleted,and
anawardwaspassedon23.02.2015.Itissubmittedthatcompensation
waspaidinaccordancewiththeapplicablelawtoallthoseeligible
propertyownerswhosepropertywasacquiredforpublicpurposes.
14.ItissubmittedthattheGovernmentporambokelandinRS.No.248/4
and248/2isclassifiedascanalland,andaportionoflandin
RS.No.247/2,249isclassifiedasburialgroundandRivascanal.The
petitionerswereoccupantsoftheselands,andtheiroccupationofthem
ishighlyobjectionable.
15.Thepetitionershaveoccupiedthegovernmentlandillegallyandcannot
seekcompensationafterenjoyingthepropertyforalltheseyears
withoutanyvestedinterest.Itissubmittedthatnoneofthepetitioners
hasthelocustochallengetheactsoftherespondentauthoritiesin
decliningtograntgovernmentpropertyrequiredforpublicpurposes.
16.TherespondentNo.5alsofiledcounteranditisstatedinthecounter
thattherewere118structureswhichwereaffectedonaccountof
constructionoftheROBandoutofthe118structures114structures
belongstoencroachers,however,the3rdrespondenthasvide
proceedingsdated10.05.2022approvedallotmentof88housestothe
encroachersintheGovernmentlandand26housestothetenantsin
governmentlandunderJNNURMG+3Housingonpaymentof
12
Rs.66,000/-perhouseasbeneficiaryandflatswereallottedtoallthose
beneficiariesbyconductingalottery.The5threspondentwascalled
upontopayanamountofRs.75,24,000/-infavourofthe3rd
respondent.Thedetailsofflatsallottedason12.09.2020and
04.05.2022arealsofurnished.Thelearnedstandingcounselforthe3rd
respondentalsosubmitsthatsomeofthepetitionersconsentedto
vacatingthepropertyandalsoacceptedtheflats.
17.Thelearnedstandingcounselforthe3
rd
respondentplacesrelianceon
thejudgmentoftheDivisionBenchofthisCourtinG.Ramunaidu&72
andothersVs.PrincipalSecretaryRevDept6andothers
2
.The
DivisionBenchofthisCourtatpara18and19observedasfollows;
……..18.Theoccupantsofthelands,whodonothaveD-formpattas,
arealsoclaimingthebenefitunderAct30of2013onthegroundthat
theywouldfallwithinthemeaningoflandholdersinSection3(r)ofAct
30of2013.Section3(r)ofAct30of2013readsasfollows:-
“Section-3:Definition:
InthisAct,unlessthecontextotherwiserequires;
(a)to(q)
(r)"landowner"includesanyperson,
(i)whosenameisrecordedastheownerofthelandorbuildingorpart
thereof,intherecordsoftheauthorityconcerned;or
(ii)anypersonwhoisgrantedforestrightsundertheScheduledTribes
andOtherTraditionalForestDwellers(RecognitionofForestRights)Act,
2006(2of2007)orunderanyotherlawforthetimebeinginforce;or
(iii)whoisentitledtobegrantedPattarightsonthelandunderanylaw
oftheStateincludingassignedlands;or
(iv)anypersonwhohasbeendeclaredassuchbyanorderofthecourt
orAuthority;"
19.Aplainreadingofthisprovisionwillbringwithinitsambit,only
suchpersons,whoareeitherhavingdeartitletothelandorsuch
personswhowouldbeentitledtogranttitleovertheland.Inthepresent
case,thepersons,whoareinoccupationoftheland,cannotclaim,asa
matterofright,thattheyshouldbegrantedpattasoverthelandbythe
2
WP.No.43730of2016andbatch,decidedon21.03.2025
13
Government.Thelanguageoftheprovisionscannotbegivensuchan
extendedmeaning.
18.Thepetitionersfiledtherejoinder,disputingtheclassificationoftheland
asaburialground,awaterbody,aRivascanal,etc.Itisreiteratedthat
thepetitionersmustbeconsideredlandownersforthepurposeof
compensation.
19.Heardthelearnedcounselforthepetitioners,thelearnedAssistant
GovernmentPleaderforthestateandthelearnedStandingCounsel.
Perusedthematerialonrecord.
20.Theshortpointforconsiderationiswhetherthepetitionersarejustified
inseekingthereliefasprayedforinthewritpetitionsandwhetherthe
respondentauthoritiesarestatutorilyobligatedtoacquirethelandunder
occupationofthepetitionersandpaycompensationundertheRightto
FairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013.
21.Mostofthepetitionershaveadmittedlystatedthattheyarein
occupationoftheland,whichtheyhavepossessedsincetime
immemorial,andthatthepropertywaspassedonfromtheirfathersand
forefatherstothem.Someofthepetitionersclaimedtohavepurchased
thepropertypursuanttounregisteredagreementsofsale.
22.Therespondents,intheircounter,havecategorisedthelandoccupied
bythepetitionersasgovernmentporambokeland,andtoacertain
14
extent,thesamefallsundertheRivasCanal,andacertainextent,is
classifiedasaburialground.
23.Noneofthepetitionershasfiledanytitledocumentstonegatethe
respondents'claim.Intheabsenceofanytitledocument,noneofthe
petitionersandtheirpossessionofthepropertywouldcomewithinthe
ambitofSection3(n)and3(r)oftheRighttoFairCompensationand
TransparencyinLandAcquisition,RehabilitationandResettlementAct,
2013.
24.Section27oftheRighttoFairCompensationandTransparencyinLand
Acquisition,RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013makesitamply
clearthattheCollector,afterdeterminingthemarketvalueoftheland
whichissoughttobeacquired,wouldalsohavecalculatethetotal
amountofcompensationtobepaidtothelandowner,whoselandhas
beenacquired.TheCollectorisalsorequiredtovaluetheassets
attachedtothelandtodeterminethecompensationpayabletothe
landowner.
25.ThepurposeofenactingtheRighttoFairCompensationand
TransparencyinLandAcquisition,RehabilitationandResettlementAct,
2013istoensurethatlandownersandaffectedfamiliesareprovided
withjustandfaircompensationforlandacquired.TheActalsoensures
thatlandownersandaffectedpersonsbecomepartnersindevelopment,
leadingtoimprovementsintheirpost-acquisitionsocialandeconomic
status.
15
26.AnencroacherofGovernmentlandwouldremainanencroacher,
regardlessofwhethertheencroacherhasbeeninpossessionofthe
encroachedlandfordecades.Thepossessionofthesaidpropertyby
theencroacherisneitherpermissivepossessionnorlegalised.Thesaid
possessionoflandwouldhavetobeconsideredillegal,andillegal
encroacherscannotclaimequitiesforthegrantofcompensationonpar
withthelandownershavingvalidtitleandownershipdocuments.The
encroachersofanyGovernmentlandcannotclaimanyright,title,
interest,lienoranyvestedinterestwithoutregularisationoftheir
encroachmentortheGovernmentissuinganypattasintheirfavouror
anyotherlegallyvaliddocumentwhichwouldregularisetheir
encroachment.
27.Insofarasmeetingthecriteriafortakinganyactiontoevictthem,the
respondentsareduty-boundtoissuenoticespriortotakinganysuch
action.InpursuanceoftheordersofthisCourt,14.09.2020,the
respondentshaveissuednoticestothepetitioners.Itisalsobroughtto
thenoticeoftheCourtthatalternatehouseswereprovidedtothe114
encroacherswhosepropertieswereaffected.Thismeasurewaspurely
onhumanitarianconsiderations.
28.IllegalencroacherscannotclaimcompensationandinvoketheRightto
FairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013.ThesaidActwasnot
introducedintheinterestofillegalencroachers.TheActisabeneficial
16
legislationwhichoughttobeextendedtothelandownersandproperty
owners,whohaveavalidtitleoverthesameorgrantedanyvested
rightsunderthevariousenactmentsorgrantedanypattarightsoverthe
property,includingassignedlandsorthepropertyownerswhoare
declaredasownersbyvirtueofCourtorders.
29.Thepetitioners'casesdonotfallwithinanyofthecategoriesfor
consideringthemaslandowners,asdefinedunderSection3(r)ofthe
RighttoFairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013.Section3(n)oftheRightto
FairCompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,
RehabilitationandResettlementAct,2013,wouldalsonotcometothe
rescueofthepetitioners,asnoneofthepetitionersheldthelandinthe
capacityoflandowners.
30.Ontheseconsiderations,thisCourtisoftheconsideredviewthatthe
claimofthepetitionersseekingcompensationundertheRighttoFair
CompensationandTransparencyinLandAcquisition,Rehabilitation
andResettlementAct,2013cannotbeentertainedandthepetitioners
havenotmadeoutanycaseforthegrantofanyotherrelief(s).
31.Thecontemptcasesarefiledfornon-compliancewiththisCourt's
directions.Asthewritpetitionsaredismissed,thecontemptcasesare
alsodismissed.
32.Accordingly,thewritpetitionsandthecontemptcasesaredismissed.
Nocosts.
17
Asasequel,miscellaneousapplications,pending,ifany,shallstand
closed.
____________________
JUSTICEHARINATH.N
KGM
18
THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEHARINATH.N
WRITPETITIONNos.16316,16999,17291,17335,21257of2020,19431,
22273,22281of2021,3889of2022andCC.Nos.4939and4941of2023
Dated27.01.2026
KGM
Legal Notes
Add a Note....