Allowed

Shaik Abdul Rahman v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Apr 2019WP/3737/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted a temporary injunction restraining respondent authorities from interfering with the petitioner's possession of land while acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act 2013 are pending.

What did the court decide?

Restrained the respondent authorities from interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property under the Land Acquisition Act 30 of 2013.

Shaik Abdul Rahman Vs The State of Telangana — Municipal and Town Planning | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶2

WRI T PETI TI ON No.3737 of 2019

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The grievance of the petitioner is that though in the year 2016 he was issued with a notice intimating that his land over an extent of 32.02 square yards is required for road widening, no proceedings were initiated at that point of time; however, now the respondent authorities are interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the property, without acquiring the same and paying compensation by following due procedure prescribed under law

¶5

Respondent No.3 filed counter affidavit. Paragraph No.10 of the

¶6

counter affidavit reads as under:

¶7

10. I state that, the Asst. City Planner, Circle-9, South Zone, GHMC vide Lr. No.801/ RW/ ACP/ C9/ GHMC/ 2017, dated 08-012019 submitted a fresh/ new requisition in respect of Petitioner’s property bearing MCH No.21-2-357 admeasuring to an extent of 32.20 Sq.Yds, to lay 30’ road from Lad Bazar to Mitti-Ka-Sher, opp: to Julukhan Kaman under Charminar Pedestrianisation Project, Hyderabad. The Survey staff of this 3^rd Respondent’s Office, demarcated the affected property of the Petitioner and submitted Sub-Division records for taking further action and action is being taken for approval of the 2^nd Respondent. And after approval of the 2^nd Respondent to acquire the land for Acquisition, Respondents w ill follow the procedure in accordance w ith the provisions of Land Acquisition Act 30 fo 2013.

¶8

I t is to state that, the Petitioner’s affected property w ill be acquired by follow ing due process of Law in the public interest as contemplated under Act 30 of 2013.

¶9

From the above, it is clear that, as on date, the property of the petitioner is not under acquisition; however, the same is proposed to be acquired and a requisition to that effect has already been submitted by the Assistant City Planner.

¶10

wp_3737_2019 CKR, J

¶11

¶12

In the circumstances, till such time the affected property of the petitioner is acquired by following the due procedure prescribed under law, his possession and enjoyment over the property shall not be interfered with by the respondents in any manner.

¶13

Subject to the above, the writ petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶14

______________________________
JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶15

04 th April, 2019
KSM

¶16

wp_3737_2019 CKR, J

¶17

¶18

THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTI CE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶19

WRI T PETI TI ON No.3737 of 2019
04 th April, 2019

¶20

KSM

Shaik Abdul Rahman v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Abdul Rahman v. The State of Telangana

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

M/s. Sri Veerabhadra Granites Vs The Director of Mines and Geology

M/s. Sri Veerabhadra Granites Vs The Director of Mines and Geology

Anand Raj Singh Vs State of Telangana

J.Narasimha , J.Narsingh Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Abdul Mannan Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Mohd. Rafeeq Vs The State of Telangana