Partly allowed

T. Arun Kumar, v. The District Collector

Telangana HC13 Jun 2006WP/11513/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declared irrational a notification acquiring land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which invoked the urgency clause and dispensed with Section 5-A enquiry. The Court directed the acquiring authority to issue notice to the petitioner for objections and not permit dispossession pending the outcome of the enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Directives to issue notice for objections, consider objections, and conduct Section 5-A enquiry before dispossession; injunction against dispossession pending decision.

T. Arun Kumar, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2006)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶2

W.P.NO. 11513 OF 2006

DATED: 13.6.2006

Between:

T. Arun Kumar

… Petitioner

and

The District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru and another

¶9

… Respondents

¶10

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶11

W.P.NO.11513 OF 2006

¶12

ORAL ORDER:

¶13

The petitioners’ lands are sought to be acquired by the issuance of a notification dated 21.5.2006 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). Urgency clause has been invoked under Section 17 (4) of the Act and enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act has been dispensed with mechanically without due application of mind, is the complainant.

¶14

The impugned notification states that the acquisition is for the purpose of allotment of house-sites to Harijans and other weaker sections. This requirement is not of such an emergent nature as would justify invocation of the urgency clause and dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. The enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act is a salutary statutory provision intended for affording a reasonable opportunity to the owners of lands to object to the acquisition on any relevant grounds as they wish to submit.

¶15

In the aforesaid circumstances, the decision in the impugned notification to invoke the urgency clause and dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act is declared irrational and unsustainable. The respondents are directed to issue notice to the petitioners for submission of objections if any to the proposal to acquire the lands. On the petitioners submitting their objections within the time stipulated in the notice, the same shall be considered and an appropriate decision taken duly communicating the decision to the petitioner simultaneously with the recommendations made after the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act by the acquiring authority. The petitioners shall not be dispossessed pending communication of the decision to the petitioners consequent on the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act.

¶16

The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage of admission, after

¶17

hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. There shall however be no order as to costs.

¶18

GODA RAGHURAM, J

¶19

Date: 13.6.2006

¶20

CVM

T. Arun Kumar, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Arun Kumar, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri P.v.a.S.Nehru Mohan Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its

Valluri Venkata Swamy, Vs State of a.P., rep. by District Collector

Teyagura Poli Reddy Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments

Nandimpalli Surapa Raju, Vs The Commissioner of Endowments

Syed Sayeed Pasha, Vs The Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board

Niranjan Singh Vs Deputy Commissioner of Police