The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging land acquisition for road laying. The court dismissed the case as premature and based on mere apprehension without prima facie proof, advising respondents to follow due process or obtain consent.
Writ petition dismissed on merits as based on mere apprehension without prima facie proof.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.38403 of 2015
26.11.2015
Between:
Haribaa
.. Petitioner
and
The State of Telangana,
represented by its Principal Secretary,
Panchayat Raj Department, Hyderabad and others
.. Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.S.R.Deshmukh
Counsel for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4: Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj (TS)
Counsel for respondent No.2: Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (TS)
Counsel for respondent No.5: Assistant Government Pleader for Home (TS)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the Panchayat Raj Department of State of Telangana has been trying to lay a road over his land admeasuring Acs.5.13 guntas in survey No.74/A situated at Yenkemuri Village, Kangti Mandal, Medak District, without following due process of law.
The learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj (TS) appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4, submitted that from the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition based on mere apprehension without there being any basis.
Except making an allegation that a road is sought to be laid over his land, the petitioner has not produced any prima facie proof in support thereof. The petitioner has not even made a representation to any of the respondents requesting them to refrain from laying such road. Therefore, I find merit in the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj (TS).
As this Court would not entertain writ petitions on mere apprehensions, this Writ Petition is dismissed without rendering any findings on merits, however, with the observation that in the event the respondents propose to lay road over the petitioner’s land, they shall not do so either without consent of the petitioner or without acquiring the land under the provisions of the extant statutory enactment.
As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.49443 of 2015 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand dismissed as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
26th November, 2015
GHN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition alleging a threat to property rights can be entertained on mere apprehension without prima facie proof.
Whether statutory acquisition or consent is required before laying a road over private land.
Haribaa
The State of Telangana
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
