Disposed

Bantu Shankar v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Sept 2017WP/9344/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the respondent's failure to deposit enhanced compensation awarded in a prior judgment. The petitioners sought enforcement of the raised compensation amount after the Supreme Court upheld the earlier award.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent No. 4 to deposit the enhanced compensation amount within three months from the receipt of this order.

Bantu Shankar Vs State of Telangana — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 9344 of 2017

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Telangana Housing Board.

¶4

This writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in not depositing the compensation amount which was awarded to the petitioners pursuant to the decree passed by this Court vide common judgment, dated 12.03.2014, in LAAS No.126 of 2007 and Cross Objections (SR) No.10996 of 2008, arising out of O.P.No.17 of 1997 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that with regard to the land belonging to the petitioners, which was acquired by respondent No.4, proceedings for enhancement of compensation have become final as the common judgment passed by this Court on 12.03.2014 was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissing the SLP filed by respondent No.4. In those circumstances, the petitioners filed E.P.No.31 of 2015 in O.P.No.17 of 1997. Two other claimants approached this Court by filing W.P.No.34778 of 2016 and respondent No.4 filed a counter-affidavit therein undertaking to deposit the compensation payable to them within three months from 25.11.2016 and in those circumstances, the said writ petition was disposed of on 25.11.2016. The present petitioners are not parties to the earlier

¶6

¶7

round of litigation and though the petitioners covered by the same notification and judgment, the enhanced compensation was not deposited by respondent No.4.

¶8

In view of the undisputed facts, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4 to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation in E.P.No.31 of 2015 in O.P.No.17 of 1997 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

¶10

shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

________________________
A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO,J
Dt:12.09.2017
kdl

¶12

Bantu Shankar v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bantu Shankar v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cherla Likitha Vs The State of Telangana Rep. by its PrI. Secretary

Smt. Pampana Padmavathi, D/o Narasimhamurthy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

C.B.H.K. Memorial College of Education Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Boya Ramanjaneyulu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Secretary

Kalva Lingam, Vs The State of Telangana

Nerella Sambaiah Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary