Allowed

Smt. Balija Earamma, W/o.Gokarappa, v. The Govt. of Ap., Rep. by its Secretary

Telangana HC19 Feb 2013WP/2689/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition against the inaction of the State Government in depositing enhanced land acquisition compensation sanctioned by a General Order dated 05.06.2010.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to deposit compensation amount of Rs.8,82,910/- along with subsequent interest to the credit of the Senior Civil Judge's Court, Gadwal, within three months.

Smt. Balija Earamma, W/o.Gokarappa, Vs The Govt. of Ap… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.2689 of 2013

¶2

Dated 1 9 th February, 2013

¶3

Between:

¶4

Smt.Balija Earamma and others

¶5

…Petitioners

¶6

and

¶7

the Govt.of A.P., rep.by its Secretary, Irrigation & Command Area Development Project Wing Dept., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the petitioners: Sri G.Butchaiah Goud

¶10

Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Irrigation & CAD Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3: AGP for Land Acquisition

¶11

The Court made the following:

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

The petitioners, whose lands were acquired under Award No.3 of 2006, dated 08.09.2006, filed this writ petition feeling aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in depositing enhanced compensation in terms of G.O.Rt.No.359, Irrigation and CAD (PW.LA.III.A2) Department, dated 05.06.2010.

¶14

Even though time was taken by the learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Irrigation and Land Acquisition on 31.01.2013 for instructions, no specific instructions have been reported.

¶15

From a perusal of the above-mentioned GO., it is evident that the award has been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 08.09.2006 and the reference Court has enhanced the compensation from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.1,82,000/- per acre in O.P.No.33 of 2007. Consequent on the decree, dated 05.03.2009, of the civil Court in the

¶16

above-mentioned OP, respondent No.1 has issued the abovementioned G.O., according sanction for payment of Rs.8,82,910/representing the enhanced compensation. The rightful grievance of the petitioners is that despite issuance of the said G.O., compensation has not been paid even after the expiry of nearly three years.

¶17

In my opinion, the respondents have no justification whatsoever in not paying the compensation despite sanctioning of payment under the above-mentioned GO. The respondents are therefore directed to implement the above-mentioned G.O., by deposit of the compensation amount of Rs.8,82,910/- along with the subsequent interest accrued thereon to the credit of the learned Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Gadwal, within a period of three months from today.

¶18

The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

¶19

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.3299 of 2013 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶20

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶21

19^th February, 2013 VGB

Smt. Balija Earamma, W/o.Gokarappa, v. The Govt. of Ap., Rep. by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Balija Earamma, W/o.Gokarappa, v. The Govt. of Ap., Rep. by its Secretary

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

Daddolu Venkata Ramana Reddy, S/o.Narapa Reddy, Vs The Sub-Registrar

Mohd Mudassir Ahmed Vs The Chief Secretary of Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

- Vs -

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization

Sri Sai Baba Ashirwad Sadan Flat Owners Association, Vs The Union of India

Sri Varanasi Seeta Rama Deekshitulu Vs The District Collector