Allowed

C.Kishore Kumar v. The Government of Andhra pradesh. rep.by its

Telangana HC2 Mar 2007WP/4153/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition challenged land acquisition via notification dated 5-1-2007 invoked under the urgency clause, dispensing with Section 5-A enquiry. Court held invocation irrational as expansion was not emergent, quashed draft declaration, and directed issuance of notices for objections.

What did the court decide?

Draft declaration under Section 6 quashed; respondents directed to issue notices for objections; no dispossession pending enquiry.

C.Kishore Kumar Vs The Government of Andhra pradesh… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2007)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶2

WRIT PETITION No. 4153 of 2007

¶3

DATED: 2-03-2007

¶4

Between: C.Kishore Kumar and others …Petitioners and The Government of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Land Acquisition), Hyderabad and others …Respondents.

¶5

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶6

W.P.No. 4153 of 2007

¶7

ORAL ORDER:

¶8

The petitioners lands are sought to be acquired by the issuance of a notification, dated 5-1-2007, 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 complaint. The draft notification under Section 6 of the Act has been issued on 18-2-2007.

¶9

The impugned notification states that the acquisition is for the purpose of expansion of APIIC. 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 the lands to object to the acquisition on any relevant grounds as they wish to submit.

¶10

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 notices 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

¶11

appropriate decision taken duly communicating the decision to the petitioners 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 them consequent on the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. The draft declaration dated 18-2-2007 issued under Section 6 of the Act, is quashed.

¶12

The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage of admission, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government pleader for Land Acquisition. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶13

________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J

¶14

2-3-2007 GRR

C.Kishore Kumar v. The Government of Andhra pradesh. rep.by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Kishore Kumar v. The Government of Andhra pradesh. rep.by its

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

Smt. Gudeli Mallamma, Vs The Joint Collector

P.Shivanarayana Vs The Senior Divisional Manager, LIC of India

N. Anand Naidu Vs The Commissioner , Municipal Corporation of

Vaishnavi Industries, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District, Vs The Collector (Civil Supplies)

Puli Ranga Reddy Vs Spl. Dy. Collector, L.A. Unit

Sri Tirumala Venkataramana, Vs The Joint Collector