Disposed

Kagitapu Siva Sankara Nageswara Rao, v. Union of India

Telangana HC12 Feb 2013WP/20893/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the interference with land possession and deviation from the original alignment of the Outer Ring Road at Gollapudi Village. It held that the interim order dated 13.07.2012 would govern the parties, with liberty to issue fresh notification for minor deviations.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; interim order dated 13.07.2012 to govern parties with liberty to issue fresh notification for route deviations.

Kagitapu Siva Sankara Nageswara Rao, Vs Union of India — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.20893 of 2012 Date: 12.02.2013

¶2

Between: Kagitapu Siva Sankara Nageswara Rao, and twenty two others.

¶3

... Petitioners

¶4

And

¶5

Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Roads Transport and Highways, New Delhi and four others

¶6

... Respondents

¶7

Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar

¶8

Counsel for Respondent No.1 : None appears Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : Sri S.S. Varma

¶9

Standing counsel for NHAI Counsel for Respondent No.5 : AGP for Revenue

¶10

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶11

This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive reliefs: “…….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring a) the action of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and their subordinates in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands of the petitioners and others which are not part of original alignment and the Notification vide S.O.No. 2651(E), dated 25-11-2011 issued by 1^st Respondent under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act in respect of the Gollapudi lands by taking the measurements and fixing stones etc, in

¶12

the lands of the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unauthorized, unconstitutional and in violation of Article 14, 19 & 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents and their subordinates not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ properties situated in Gollapudi village, either by conducting survey or by fixing stones or in any manner what so ever under the guise of formation of the Outer Ring Road at Gollapudi Village, (Vijayawada Bypass Section), Krishna District contrary to the notification, vide S.O. 2651, dated 25-11-2011 issued by the 1^st respondent under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act,

¶13

b) by declaring proposed action of the respondents in changing original alignment at Gollapudi Village, Krishna District in respect of the Outer Ring Road, (Vijayawada By-pass Section) contrary to 3-A Notification vide S.O.No.2651 (E), dated 2511-2011 issued by the 1^st respondent in order protect the persons who are in power at the costs of lives of the petitioners without there being any justification as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation Article 14, 19 & 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to proceed with the formation of Outer Ring Road at Gollapudi Village, (Vijayawada By-pass Section), Krishna District only in accordance with the original alignment and Section 3-A notification, dated 25-11-2011 vide S.O.No.2651 (E) issued by the 1^st respondent which is published in official Gazette,

¶14

c) and to pass such other order or orders.”

¶15

On 13.07.2012, this Court, while admitting the Writ Petition, granted the following order:

¶16

“ pending further orders, the respondents shall not take up any work contrary to the alignment fixed by them, and the notification issued under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, dated 25-11-2011.”

¶17

In the counter-affidavit filed along with the vacate stay application, the Project Director of respondent No.4 has inter alia stated that there is no deviation in the alignment marked on the ground with

¶18

reference to the approved alignment, and that there are only minor mistakes in Survey Numbers due to mismatch of the alignment with the Revenue village maps. It is further stated that if there is any deviation in the extent of the required land in the already notified Survey numbers or any new survey numbers falling with reference to the land plan schedules, fresh notification under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956, will be issued separately after obtaining such plan schedules from the feasibility consultants.

¶19

The learned standing Counsel for NHAI, submitted that they will strictly execute the works in accordance with the alignment fixed and that if any change of alignment is needed, they will issue a fresh notification.

¶20

In view of the above-submission, interim order, dated 13-07-2012, shall govern the parties, however, with liberty to the respondents to issue fresh notification, in the event, any mistakes have occurred in finalising the route as per the original alignment.

¶21

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶22

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.V.M.P.No.3640 of 2012 in/and W.P.M.P.No.26768 of 2012, are disposed of.

¶23

_______________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dt: 12-02-2013 SKA/LUR

Kagitapu Siva Sankara Nageswara Rao, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kagitapu Siva Sankara Nageswara Rao, v. Union of India

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. Vaddapally Kamalamma, W/o. Rajagopal Naidu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its

Sri P.Netaji, Vs The Development Credit Bank Ltd., Rep by its

M/s Muthyal Rao Co-op. Housing Society Ltd, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M. Adinaryana, Vs Sri Rajeshwar Tiwari, I.A.S.

Gangana Obi Reddy, Vs Kolala Ujjinappa , Gittappa

Kumari Chinanapa Reddy, Vs The Govt. of A.P.