Disposed

Gorrela Ramudu , Ramu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC2 Mar 2016WP/6872/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging preliminary notification for land acquisition. Court directed authorities to consider petitioner's objection regarding name omission and communicate decision within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents 2 and 3 to consider petitioner's petition and communicate decision within four weeks; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Gorrela Ramudu , Ramu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶2

WP.No.6872 of 2016

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

A notification under Section 11(1) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 has been issued on 23.12.2015 proposing to acquire certain land in Survey No.200/1, 200/3 and 290/1B of Sarabhavaram Village, Devipatnam Mandal, East Godavari District for construction of earth dam under Polavaram Irrigation Project.

¶5

2. The petitioner herein has filed a petition on 08.02.2016 to 2^nd respondent for such acquisition contending that he is a joint pattadar along with others whose names have been shown in the said notification. He alleged that his name was intentionally omitted at the instance of his brother since his brother wanted to knock away the entire compensation. The said petition has been filed before the 2^nd respondent, and copy of which has also been marked by 3^rd respondent.

¶6

3. The counsel for petitioner contends that this petition has not been considered by respondent nos.2 and 3 and that they are likely to issue a final notification under the above Act ignoring the petition of petitioner.

¶7

4. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition (Andhra Pradesh), appearing for respondents, states that respondent nos.2 and 3 will consider the petitioner’s petition dt.08.02.2016

¶8

within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶9

5. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent nos.2 and 3 to consider petitioner’s petition dt.08.02.2016 to the preliminary notification issued in Form No.6A on 23.12.2015 by 1^st respondent within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate their decision thereon to petitioner. No order as to costs.

¶10

6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶11

JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶12

Date: 02-03-2016 Ndr/*

Gorrela Ramudu , Ramu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorrela Ramudu , Ramu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Iragam Reddy Thirupal Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kona Bheemeswara Rao, Vs The Penumarthi Gram Panchayat

Chandra Priya Apartments Flt Owners Association Vs The Government of a.P., rep by its Principal Secretary

Yedla Sammakka Warangal Dist and 11 Others Vs Prl Secy Revenue Dept Hyd and 3 Others

B.Saroj KUmar, S/o B.Srinivasulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Kasturi Jyothi Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary