Disposed

Mannava Sai Madhuri, v. The Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Sept 2021WP/4440/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition challenging the National Highways Authority's possession of land, the Single Judge observed that an earlier Acquisition Award might not cover the petitioner's specific parcel. To cure the doubt, the court directed Revenue authorities to conduct a fresh survey to ascertain coverage and report back before any further action is taken.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 5th respondent to arrange for a survey of the property and submit a report to the 4th respondent within four weeks to ascertain if the petitioner's land is covered by Award No.11 of 2013

Mannava Sai Madhuri, Vs The Union of India — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.4440 OF 2021

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

In the present Writ Petition, grievance of the petitioner is the alleged interference of respondents 3 and 4 with her possession in respect of plot No.11A admeasuring 135 square yards in L.P. No.18/2008/Vja in R.S. No.568/1A and 568/1B of Nunna village, Vijayawada rural mandal, Krishna district.

¶4

Heard Sri Sasanka Bhuvanagiri, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.S.Varma, learned Standing Counsel for NHAI for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri P.Subhash, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 5 to 7.

¶5

According to the petitioner, she purchased an extent of 135 square yards of land bearing plot No.11A in L.P. No.18/2008/Vja in R.S. No.568/1A and 568/1B of Nunna village, Vijayawada rural mandal, Krishna district by way of a registered sale deed dated 18.02.2016. Sum and substance of the case of the petitioner is that without there being any proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956, the respondents-National Highway authorities are contemplating to utilize the said property for the purpose of laying bypass road connecting National Highway No.16 between Vijayawada and Gundugolanu.

¶6

¶7

A counter affidavit, deposed by 4^th respondent, is filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. According to the said counter affidavit, a Notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 was published on 13.01.2012; a declaration under Section 3D (1) of the Act was published on 22.11.2012 and enquiry under Section 3G of the Act was conducted on 20.01.2013, and an Award eventually came to be passed on 04.11.2013. It is further stated that the awarded amount covered by the said Award has been deposited with 5^th respondent on 22.11.2013. It is also stated that the Tahsidar-6^th respondent herein handed over possession of the land to the National Highways Authority of India on 06.02.2014.

¶8

Vide Memo dated 26.07.2021, a copy of the subject Award bearing No.11 of 2013, dated 04.11.2013 is made available by the learned Standing Counsel for National Highways Sri S.S.Varma. A perusal of the said Award shows in clear and unequivocal terms that the Competent Authority passed the Award and serial No.21 at page No.25 deals with R.S. No.568/B admeasuring 5383 square meters and compensation was fixed at Rs.51,89,212/-.

¶9

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the total extent of property in R.S. Nos.568/1A

¶10

¶11

and 568/1B is Ac.2.28 cents, but the Competent Authority passed the Award not for the entire extent of the property covered by the said survey numbers. It is further submitted that the Award does not cover the balance of Ac.0.95 cents of the property and the petitioner’s land is situated in the said balance extent of property not covered by the Award.

¶12

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 to 4 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 5 to 7, in order to have a quietus for the entire issue and keeping in view the larger public interest, as the issue in the present Writ Petition pertains to laying of National Highways, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, directing the respondents 5 to 7 to arrange for survey of the property in the subject survey numbers and, if required, other survey numbers, after issuing notice to the petitioner and all stakeholders, and submit a report to respondents 1 to 4 herein with the particulars as to whether the land purchased by the petitioner in the year 2016 is covered by the Award No.11 of 2013, dated 04.11.2013, so as to enable the National Highway authorities to take further steps in the matter. It is made clear that if the said land belonging to the

¶13

¶14

petitioner is found to be not covered by the above Award, necessarily, the National Highway authorities have to take appropriate steps as per the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

No order as to costs of the Writ Petition.

¶16

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if

¶17

any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.

A.V.SESHA SAI, J

17.09.2021 DRK

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.4440 OF 2021

¶23

17.09.2021

¶24

DRK

Mannava Sai Madhuri, v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mannava Sai Madhuri, v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vallur Usha Rani, Vs The Honble Court of the First Additional Munsif Magistrate

G. Narayana, Vs The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Ande Krishna Murthy Vs the Vidyut Ombudsman, Hyderabad, and 4 Otrs.

G. Prem Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mekala Srinivasa Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

The Sudha Products Rep.by its Proprietor Vs Chief Managing Director