Allowed

J. Sriramulu, v. the Government of Telangana

Telangana HC17 Oct 2014WP/28056/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In batched writ petitions, farmers sought compensation for land acquisition delayed since 2006 due to lack of State funds. The court rejected the State's maintainability objection, relied on a Larger Bench precedent allowing writ intervention for inordinate delay, and directed the State to provide funds within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Government to provide requisite funds towards compensation within 6 weeks and the Land Acquisition Officer to deposit the amount in the Senior Civil Judge's court within 1 week of receip

J. Sriramulu, Vs the Government of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN

¶4

Present

¶5

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.28015 of 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

D. Thippa Reddy, S/o. Linganna, Aged 40 years, R/o. Satyavaram Village, Makthal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶9

.. Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶12

WRIT PETITION No.28017 of 2014

¶13

Between:

¶14

K. Rangappa, S/.o. Nagappa, Aged 54 years, R/o. Kondadoddi Village, Makthal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶15

.. Petitioner

¶16

AND

¶17

The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department,

¶18

Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.28020 of 2014 Between: N. Buchanna, S/o. Ashanna, Aged 5o years, R/o. Arepalli Village, Athmakur Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .. Petitioner AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others WRIT PETITION No.28022 of 2014 Between: Jagadeesh, S/o. Buchanna, Aged 45 years, R/o. Athmakur Village, Athmakur Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .. Petitioner AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others WRIT PETITION No.28024 of 2014 Between:

¶20

Rukmangadha Reddy, S/o. Shiva Reddy, Aged 46 years, R/o. Kondair Village, Itikyal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶21

.. Petitioner

¶22

AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.28025 of 2014

¶24

Between: Bandi Veera Pratap, S/o. D. Venkata Swamy, Aged about 46 years, R/o. Dharmavaram Village, Itikyal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .. Petitioner AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others WRIT PETITION No.28056 of 2014 Between: J. Sriramulu, S/o. Bheemanna, Aged 61 years, R/o. Dharmavaram Village, Itikyal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .. Petitioner AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

¶25

Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.28058 of 2014

¶27

Between: M. Lakshmidevamma, W/o. Venkatanna, Aged 65 years, R/o. Athmakur Village, Athmakur Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶28

.. Petitioner

¶29

AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others WRIT PETITION No.29285 of 2014

¶30

Between: Chandranna, S/o. Hanmanthu, Aged about 54 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Mittanandimalla Village, Narva Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. AND The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶31

.. Petitioner

¶32

.. Respondents

¶33

WRIT PETITION No.29313 of 2014

¶34

Between: Mohammed Hussain, S/o. Khasim Sab, Aged about 51 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Mittanandimalla Village, Narva Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

¶35

.. Petitioner

¶36

AND

¶37

The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶38

WRIT PETITION No.29325 of 2014

¶39

Between: Mahindra Reddy, S/o. Narasimha Reddy, Aged about 62 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Yellampalli Village, Narva Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

¶40

.. Petitioner

¶41

AND

¶42

The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶43

AND

¶44

WRIT PETITION No.30655 of 2014

¶45

Between: Enginla Dubbanna, S/o. Nagappa, Aged about 55 years, R/o. Aloor Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District & 2 others

¶46

.. Petitioners

¶47

AND

¶48

The Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others

¶49

The Court made the following:

¶50

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶51

WRIT PETITION Nos.28015, 28017, 28020, 28022, 28024, 28025, 28056, 28058, 29285, 29313, 29325 & 30655 of 2014

¶52

COMMON ORDER:

¶53

In all this batch of cases, the grievance of the petitioners is that in spite of grant of enhanced compensation and dismissal of appeals filed by the State as early as in the year 2011, the

¶54

full amount of compensation is not paid till date. Even though the petitioners have filed E.Ps, they are unsuccessful in securing the amounts since the concerned Land Acquisition Officer’s properties were already attached in other land acquisition proceedings and there are no other properties for attachment and the Land Acquisition Officer expressed his inability to comply with the mandate of the Court since the Government, has not provided the requisite funds. Compelled by the inordinate delay in paying the compensation due and payable to the petitioners, these writ petitions are instituted.

¶55

2. For the sake of convenience, the details in W.P.No.28015 of 2014 are taken.

¶56

3. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) was issued on 01.03.1996. The proceedings culminated in passing Award No.6 of 2002 on 28.01.2002. Land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac. 3.00 guntas, situated in Satyavaram Village, Makthal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District, was acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer determined compensation at Rs.27,500/- per acre. On the application filed by the petitioner for enhancement of compensation, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Gadwal. Similar such references were made in all cases. So far as this petitioner is concerned, the matter which was referred to the Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal, is numbered as O.P.No.9 of 2005. The Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal, passed orders in O.P.No.9 of 2005 on 30.06.2006 enhancing the compensation to that of Rs.64/- per square meter. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Senior

¶57

Civil Judge on 30.06.2006, the State preferred appeals before this Court. Insofar as this petitioner is concerned, the appeal preferred against award in O.P.No.9 of 2005 is numbered as A.S.No.764 of 2007. Batch of appeals were dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment, dated 09.06.2011, confirming the order passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal. Having waited for considerable time and having requested personally the Land Acquisition Officer to pay the compensation as determined in O.P.No.9 of 2005, the petitioner filed E.P.No.14 of 2013. The E.P. is pending since the Land Acquisition Officer do not have the funds to comply with the award passed and the State is not providing the requisite funds.

¶58

4. As per the claim made in E.P.No.14 of 2013, insofar as this petitioner is concerned, the total amount of compensation payable to him was Rs.5,57,027/-. An amount of Rs.2,73,622/- was deposited and was paid to the petitioner. After the deduction of the amount already paid, an amount of Rs.2,83,405/- was still due and payable and this money is yet to be paid to the petitioner. Similar is the case with all the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions though the numbers and dates and extent of acquisition and amount payable may vary. The common grievance of all the petitioners in these writ petitions is that even though the appeals were dismissed on 09.06.2011, even after 3 ½ years the amounts payable to the petitioners are not paid and the petitioners are subjected to lot of hardship and suffering on account of inordinate delay in payment of compensation to which they are legally entitled. In fact, the Senior Civil Judge passed orders on 30.06.2006 and if that date is taken, for more than eight years the enhanced

¶59

amount of compensation is not paid to the petitioners.

¶60

5. Earlier these matters were adjourned to enable the learned Government Pleaders for Irrigation as well as Land Acquisition for the State of Telangana to obtain instructions as to the reason for non-payment of compensation payable to the petitioners and the time frame required by the State to pay the compensation.

¶61

6. The letter addressed by the Special Deputy Collector, Gadwal, to the learned Government Pleaders for Land Acquisition and Irrigation, dated 13.10.2014, is placed before this Court. It is evident from the said letter that having decided to comply with the award passed enhancing the compensation, after the dismissal of appeals the Land Acquisition Officer addressed letter to the Government on 03.09.2013 and the matter is under consideration thereafter. Even after one year, there is no communication from the Government releasing the amount as required for the purpose of payment of compensation to the persons whose lands were compulsorily acquired.

¶62

7. The learned Government Pleaders for Land Acquisition and Irrigation raised objection on maintainability of the writ petitions on the ground that the petitioners have to avail the remedy of filing execution petition before the civil Court and having availed the remedy, they have to await for the decision and on the same issue the writ petition is not maintainable.

¶63

8. The only objection of both the learned Government Pleaders is on maintainability of the writ petition. A Larger Bench of this Court in BHIMIDIPATI ANNAPOORNA BHAVANI

¶64

Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, YELURU RESERVOIR PROJECT, PEDDAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT,

¶65

A.P. AND OTHER S^[1] has considered the issue of maintainability of writ petitions claiming payment of compensation determined in the land acquisition proceedings vis-à-vis the institution of execution proceedings before the competent Court. Considering the two different opinions expressed by two Full Benches of this Court, the Larger Bench of this Court held that in cases arising out of the Act where the amount of compensation finally determined has not been paid, a person must first resort to the alternative efficacious remedy of taking out execution and when despite taking out execution proceedings, if there is any delay caused on the part of the authorities, resort can be had to filing of writ petition in this Court and, this Court, while exercising its discretionary jurisdiction, in appropriate cases, may issue directions for immediate deposit of the amount of compensation by the State Government or the authorities on whose behalf the land has been acquired.

¶66

9. In view of the same, the objection of the learned Government Pleaders is not valid and hence rejected.

¶67

10. As seen from the averments in the writ petition affidavit and the written instructions furnished to the learned Government Pleaders by the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit, Gadwal, the compensation as determined is not paid since the competent authority in the State Government has not sanctioned the amounts payable. Unless the amounts

¶68

are sanctioned to the Land Acquisition Officer, the said amounts cannot be deposited. As seen from the letter, a request for granting such sanction was made by the Land Acquisition Officer on 03.09.2013 and such request has to be considered and appropriate orders are to be passed by the Government. No reasons are forthwith coming as to why the request of the Land Acquisition Officer is not considered immediately and the amount is not released.

¶69

11. All the farmers have lost their land and they were paid a meager compensation. The order enhancing the compensation was passed in June, 2006, and the appeals filed by the State were dismissed in June, 2011. Acquisition relates back to 1996 and the awards were passed in the year 2002. Therefore, even after 12 years of acquisition, the compensation payable to the petitioners is not fully paid. For no fault of the petitioners, they are made to suffer the ignominy of not receiving the full compensation and not utilizing the funds for alternative purposes which they are legitimately entitled to utilize. As noticed by the Larger Bench of this Court, this is a glaring case of lethargic attitude of the Government in complying with the statutory mandate of paying compensation in time when they resort to compulsory acquisition of lands of the farmers. The farmers have no option but to surrender the land as the acquisition was for public purpose. Therefore, the inordinate delay in payment of compensation is inexcusable.

¶70

12. The petitioners were helpless in enforcing the decree passed in their favour since the Land Acquisition Officer expressed inability to comply with the award as no amount is

¶71

available with him and the State Government has not made provision for payment of compensation. In the circumstances, they have no alternative remedy except to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. In the facts of these cases, the petitioners have made out case for exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction by this Court and granting relief as sought by them.

¶72

13. Having regard to the facts of this case, the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the respondent Government to provide requisite funds towards compensation payable to the petitioners within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of the amount, the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Collector, Bheema Project, Mahaboobnagar, Mahaboobnagar District (3^rd respondent) shall deposit the amount in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶73

_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 17^th October, 2014 KL

¶74

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶75

WRIT PETITION Nos.28015, 28017, 28020, 28022, 28024, 28025, 28056, 28058, 29285, 29313, 29325 & 30655 of 2014

¶76

Date: 17^th October, 2014

¶77

¶78

[1] 2005 (3) ALD 233 (LB)

J. Sriramulu, v. the Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J. Sriramulu, v. the Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Habibullah Aarif Vs The Chief Manager Power Grid Corporation Steel Plant

Smt.Dasari Sujata Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd., (a Govt of India

Kanakatala Rama Devi Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Limited

K.Rangappa, S/o. Nagappa, Vs The Government of Telangana

Bandlamudi Narasimha Rao Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh,rep.by its Secretary

Paruchuri Janardhana Rao Vs Government of India, Rep. by its Under Secretary to