In a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings initiated without statutory process, the court held that the respondents must follow due process of law. Because the interim order was already in effect, the primary writ petition was disposed of without further adjudication on the merits. No costs awarded.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.10722 of 2009
ORDER:
“It is submitted that road widening or junction improvements will be carried out as per approved 1971 Master Plan and DP 13/87 and the same has got to be implemented by the authorities concerned. Hence, it is false to state that this respondent is influenced by others and hence denied. In respect of legal properties having the building permission, if required for widening the road, this respondent as well as the 2nd respondent will negotiate with the owners of land and building for such road widening and on their consent only, the same will be utilized for the purpose of road widening. The writ
2
petitioners, who have raised their structures contrary to the Building Rules and Zonal Regulations, cannot prevent this respondent or any other authority from implementation of road widening as per the 1971 Master Plan.”
costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
______________________________
A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J
15-11-2016
Gsn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging land acquisition attempts without prior proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act should be disposed of.
Writ Petitioners
1st Respondent
2nd Respondent
A. Ramalingeswara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
