The petitioner seeks compensation for land assigned by the Government that was later resumed; the court orders the respondent to examine the claim and decide within two months.
direct respondent to examine petitioner's claim and decide compensation within two months
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO.11790 OF 2010
ORDER:
Heard Sri Koona Reddy Anji Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. At their request, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.
The petitioner claims to have been assigned land by the Government. It is his grievance that, despite the land assigned to him earlier being resumed, though the compensation amount was agreed to be paid by the Government, and a cheque towards the compensation amount payable was made ready, the said cheque was not issued to him, on the ground that had he failed to produce the original Pattadar Pass Book. The petitioner would contend that, since the original Pattadar Pass Book was lost, he had filed a Xerox copy thereof and that this Court should direct the respondent to issue the cheque based on the Xerox copy of the Pattadar Pass Book.
It is not for this Court to decide as to what are the documents which should be examined by the competent authority to satisfy himself as to whether lands were assigned to the petitioner and whether, on its resumption, he is entitled for payment of compensation, for these all are matters which the respondent herein is required to determine. Since the petitioner claims that the original Pattadar Pass Book was lost, the respondent shall examine the petitioner’s contention, the Revenue records concerned and, in case, he is satisfied that the land which have been resumed was, in fact assigned to the petitioner earlier, and that the petitioner is entitled for payment of compensation, to consider payment of compensation to him in accordance with law. Needless to state that the entire exercise in this
regard, including an enquiry being made into the genuineness of the petitioner’s claim of being an assignee and of his being entitled for payment of compensation, shall be completed, and a decision taken in accordance with law within a period of two {2} months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs.
_______________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J)
11th June 2010 RRB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for land that was assigned and subsequently resumed.
petitioner
respondent
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
