Dismissed

Smt. Dantuluri Venkata laxmi v. The District Collector

Telangana HC11 Dec 2018WP/42907/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a land owner challenging dispossession due to land acquisition. The Court held that as rival claims were referred to the Acquisition Authority under Section 77(2), the petitioner should raise objections before the Authority.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of the Writ Petition; pending miscellaneous petitions to stand closed.

Smt. Dantuluri Venkata laxmi Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.42907 OF 2018

¶3

DATED :11.12.2018

¶4

Between :

¶5

Smt Dantuluri Venkata Laxmi, W/o.Venkata Nelladri Raju, Aged about 52 yrs, Occu : Housewife, D.No.19-1-345/A/1, Bank Colony, Peddapuram, East Godavari District, A.P.

¶6

.. Petitioner

¶7

And

¶8

The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada, East Godavari District, A.P. & others.

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

This court made the following :

¶11

¶12

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.42907 OF 2018

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶15

Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondents.

¶16

Petitioner claims to have purchased land to an extent of Ac.0-11 cents in Sy.No.161/1B out of Ac.7-20 cents and claims to be in possession. The land acquisition proceedings ended in passing of Award. Petitioner claims that the respondents are attempting to dispossess her from the above extent of land without following the due process.

¶17

Learned Government Pleader informs the Court that the Land Acquisition proceedings culminated in passing of Award. He further informs that as there are rival claims, the matter was referred to the Authority under Section 77 (2) of the Act, 30 of 2013. A copy of the Award is also furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. Since the land acquisition proceedings culminated in passing of Award it is no more open for the petitioner to contend that due process is not followed.

¶18

Since the matter is already referred to the Authority under Section 77 (2) of the Act 30 of 2013, if petitioner has any objection on rival claim made, which issue is referred to the Authority, it is open to the petitioner to file objections.

¶19

¶20

Thus, leaving it open to the petitioner to raise all pleas as available in law, before the Authority, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

¶21

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

¶22

11^th December, 2018 Rds

Smt. Dantuluri Venkata laxmi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Dantuluri Venkata laxmi v. The District Collector

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

The Managing Committee, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal

The Ongole Tobacco Processing and Marketing Cooperative Society Ltd, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Avula Venkata Narayana Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Koppisetti Edukondalu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Rama Rao, Visakhapatnam Dist. Vs the Govt.of a.P.,Rep.by Prl.Secretary,C.S.,Hyd.,and 2 Otrs.

Nallagopu Krishna Murthy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh