Disposed

K. Syamsundar Reddy, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC17 Apr 2012WP/19647/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition challenging the Government's apportionment of alternate land. It directed the Municipal Commissioner to finalize the apportionment and notify interested claimants within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to finalize apportionment of alternate site among claimants within two months after giving notice.

K. Syamsundar Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH

¶2

W.P. No. 19647 of 2011

¶3

DATED: 17.04.2012

¶4

Between: K. Syamsundar Reddy .. Petitioner And 1. The Govt. of A.P. and two others .. Respondents

¶5

O R D ER:

¶6

This writ petition is filed questioning the order passed by the 1^st respondent-Government vide G.O.Rt. No. 823, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (W1) Department, dated 29.06.2011.

¶7

The impugned order issued by the Government is with regard to the allotment of equal alternate land for the petitioner and others in exchange of the land acquired by the authorities and consequential direction given by the Government to the Municipal Commissioner, Nellore to decide apportionment of alternate site among different claimants. Questioning the apportionment, the present writ petition is filed.

¶8

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the aspect of apportionment has to be done by the civil Court as contemplated under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A reference is being made by the affected parties, in such an event, the 1^st respondent has committed illegality in directing the 3^rd respondent to decide apportionment of alternate site.

¶9

The learned Standing Counsel for Nellore Municipality has submitted that with regard to the direction given to the Municipal Commissioner for deciding apportionment vide G.O.Rt.No. 823, dated 29.06.2011, the matter does not pertain to the year 1996, as such, appropriate time may be fixed for the purpose of adjudicating the issue.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:

¶11

“The 3^rd respondent – Municipal Commissioner, Nellore is directed to finalize the matter by deciding apportionment of equal alternate site among different claimants including the petitioner in pursuance of the G.O.Rt.No. 823, dated 29.06.2011, after giving notice to the petitioner and other claimants who are interested in the petition schedule property, as per the Notification dated 05.10.1995 published in the Nellore District Gazette, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶12

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No

¶13

order as to costs.

¶14

________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J 17.04.2012

¶15

Note: Furnish copy by one week b/o bcj

K. Syamsundar Reddy, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Syamsundar Reddy, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pinjari Pedda Swamanna Vs The Govt. of Andhra PRadesh

A.M. Emanuel Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation of

Rajanikanth Vs The Commissioner

G Rajender Prasad, Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

M. Ome Prakash Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Chiman Lal Agarwal Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporatio, Tank bund