Samadi Bhaskaraiah Vs the State of Ap

SAMADI BHASKARAIAH, S/O. LATE S. BAKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 301, SUN RISE APARTMENT, THIMMINAIDUPALEM, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

...PETITIONER

¶15

AND

¶16

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VADDESWARAM, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶18

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶19

THE TIRUPATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the acts of the 4th respondent and their authorities that without paying compensation to the petitioner, demolition of petitioners G plus 2 floor house bearing D.No. 22-1-40, Thimmidnaidu palem. Revenue Ward No. 22, Tirupati and laying road in petitioner house site in any extent of 630 square feets situated in Sy. No. 167-

2

HN, J

W.P.No.23890_2024

1, 168-1 and 176 of Thimminaidpalem village accounts, Tirupati Urban Mandalam, Now Tirupati District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Violation of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and violation of Article 14, 19, 21 and 300-A Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent a) to pay the compensation to the petitioner property by following due process of law along with interest, b)to pay the future laws of rental income which is derived from house of the petitioner, c) to pay house structure cost, to the petitioner, as per the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct 4 th respondent to consider the petitioner representations, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶27

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein/Respondent in writ petition No.23890 of 2024 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.CHAMARTHY LEELA SRINNIVASA VARMA

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In

¶32

2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶33

3

¶34

HN, J W.P.No.23890_2024

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in not paying compensation for the demolition of the petitioner’s residential structure bearing Door No.22-1-40, Thimmidnaidupalem, Revenue Ward No.22, Tirupati.

¶37

It is submitted that an extent of 630 square feet belonging to the petitioner, situated in Survey Nos.167-1, 168-1 and 176 of Timmidnaidupalem, has been taken over by the respondent No.4 for the purpose of laying a road. It is submitted that no notice was issued and that respondent No.4, in a high-handed manner, demolished the petitioner’s property and laid the road. In this regard, the petitioner approached the respondents seeking compensation. However, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for grant of compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It is submitted that the respondents have placed reliance on an alleged undertaking dated 26.10.2023. It is also submitted that the petitioner never agreed to accept TDR Bonds. However, the alleged undertaking dated 26.10.2026 was signed by somebody else and not by the petitioner.

¶38

The learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent No.4 has filed a counter, wherein it is stated that the petitioner had agreed to accept TDR Bonds and had given an undertaking to that effect. It is also stated that

¶39

4

¶40

HN, J

¶41

W.P.No.23890_2024 the Government of Andhra Pradesh has constituted a Scrutiny Committee for issuance of TDR Bonds to property owners whose land is affected by the Master Plan road widening, and that the proposal relating to the petitioner’s land will be placed before the Scrutiny Committee for appropriate orders.

¶42

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner owns only a small extent of land and that the TDR Bonds, which are yet to be issued for the land taken over in the year 2023, would be of no use to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶43

Considering the submissions, the action of the respondents in taking over the petitioner’s property without issuing any notice cannot be considered as a lawful or rational act. The respondents ought to have issued a notice to the petitioner calling upon for the objections of the petitioner. On the facts of the present case, it is evident that respondent No.4 has taken over the petitioner’s property without issuing any notice and, as on date, the respondents have not taken up any steps to compensate the petitioner in a manner acceptable to the petitioner.

¶44

On these considerations, the present writ petition is disposed off, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,

5

HN, J

W.P.No.23890_2024

2013, or by extending any other proposal acceptable to the petitioner. It is needless to mention the petitioner shall execute a gift deed in favor of respondent No.4 in respect of the affected extent of land belonging to the petitioner. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall pass appropriate orders requiring the petitioner to execute the gift deed in favor of respondent No.4. The entire process of execution and registration of the gift deed shall be completed within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall pass necessary orders granting compensation to the petitioner in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, or by extending any other proposal acceptable to the petitioner, within a period of eight (08) weeks thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶49

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶50

___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶51

Date:09.07.2026 NKA

¶52

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶53

6

¶54

HN, J W.P.No.23890_2024