Disposed

Jalumuru nagabhusana Rao, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Telangana HC24 Jun 2010WP/16210/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the respondent to re-present a land acquisition reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, within two months without further delay, dismissing the writ petition after agreement in principle among parties.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to re-present reference under Section 18 of the Act within two months; no order as to costs.

Jalumuru nagabhusana Rao, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.16210 of 2009

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondent.

¶4

The petitioners state that the respondent acquired their agricultural lands to an extent of Acs.3.43 situated in Parvatisampet Village, Amadalavalasa Mandal, for the purpose of constructing houses to weaker sections. That as the respondent passed award fixing very low compensation, they received the compensation fixed under the award under protest and requested the respondent to make a reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). They also state that the respondent made a reference under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, but on 27.07.2000, the Court returned the reference with certain objections granting seven days time for compliance and re-presentation.

¶5

While so, it is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondent has not re-presented the reference so far, in spite of several representations, legal notices and moving the District Legal Services Authority, Srikakulam in this regard. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶6

This Court issued notice before admission on 07.08.2009 and thereafter the matter underwent several adjournments. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, has submitted that the application made by the petitioners seeking reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act is within time, that due to some administrative reasons, the respondent could not re-present the reference before the Court by complying with the objections raised and that in due course, the reference will be represented.

¶7

In the circumstances, the learned counsel appearing for both the parties agreed for disposal of the writ petition with the following directions:

¶8

The respondent is directed to comply with the objections raised by the reference Court and re-present the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and ensure that the matter is disposed of expeditiously, without any further delay. It is made clear that no extension of time would be granted for complying with the objections and re-presenting the matter before the reference Court.

¶9

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶10

___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J.

¶11

Date:24.06.2010 VGB

Jalumuru nagabhusana Rao, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jalumuru nagabhusana Rao, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

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

D.Uma Devi Vs K.Sukumar Reddy

Penubaku Balakotaiah, Vs Kantilal Dande, The District Collector

S.Syed Saheb, Vs S.C. Sankaramma

Ponnapureddy Rama Subba Reddy Vs The Superintendent of Police

Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society Vs The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent

The New India Assurancce Company Limited Vs Raparthi Trinadha Rao