Disposed

Billakuri Padma v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Nov 2021WP/17079/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Admitted a writ petition challenging land acquisition without compensation. Relying on respondent instructions that the land was not notified or requisitioned, disposed of the petition directing the State not to dispossess the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; directed respondents not to dispossess petitioner from land in Survey No.21812/2 followed without due process.

Billakuri Padma Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶5

Between:

¶6

WRIT PE TITION NO: 17075 O F 2021

¶7

R/o.H.No.5-72, P1l:!yli-Pg.dlg, ,Wo.^pugfqt9l, fo9^{45_ years, occ: Asriculture.} venKatapur, Stambampalli, District Jagtial, State of T.S. ...PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

1 . The State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary Government of

¶10

^^{Kevertue LandAcquisitionDepprtTen! Telangana SecretariatHyderabad.}

¶11

The District Collector, Jaqtial District. Jaotial.^-

¶12

The Land Acquisition officerffhe Reven"ue Divisional officer, Jagtial, Jagtial District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Velgatur Mandal, Jagtial District.

¶14

..,RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or orders declaring the action of Respondent No.3 and 4 in acquiring land bearing sy.No.2l\l2l2 to an extent of Ac.1-0i Gts situated at Velgatur Village and Mandal, Dist. Jagtial without notifying, without following due procedure, and without paying any compensation to the petitioner as being arbitrary, vindictive, illegal, violative of Articles 14, 16,21 and 3004 of the constitution of lndia, without conducting any enquiry and without following due process of law and against to the principles of Natural Justice, and consequenfly direct the Respondents to follow due process of law in acquiring land bearing Sy.No.21\t2t2 to an extent of Ac..l-0i Gts situated at Velgatur Village and Mandal, Dist, Jagtial.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to disturb the peaceful possession of petitioner over land bearing Sy.No.218l2l2 to an extent of Ac.1-01 Gts situated at Velgatur Village & Mandal, Dist. Jagtial till the completion of payment of compensation pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KONDADI AJAY KUMAR

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

{

¶22

/ It/

¶23

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR} Writ No.17 of

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This writ Petition 1S filed questioning^{the action of the} respondents in^acqurrlng the land of^{petitioner admeasuring} Ac. 1 .0 1^{guntasin SurveyNo.2l8l2l2 situated at VelgaturVillage} and Mandal,^{JagtialDistrict, withoutfollowingthe due procedure} and without PaYing^{comPensation'}

¶26

Heard learned^{counsel for the petitioner and learned} Additional^{Advocate Generai appearingfor the respondentsand} with their^{consent,the writ petition is taken up for hearing and} disposal at^{the stage of admission'}

¶27

The petitioner^{contends that the respondentshave issued} Notification^{uideproceedings No'G1/23412O dated17'O5'2O2O in} respect of land^{in Survey No-2191212 for the purpose of formation} of Kaleshwaram^{Project for liftingwater from the foreshore of} Sripad Yellampalli^{Project to MidmaneruResorvoir'Thoughthe} saidnotificationdidnotincludethelandofthepetitioner, admeasuring^{Ac.1'01 guntas in Survey No'21812/2'underthe} guise of the notification^{issued, the respondents have encroached} into the land of^{the petitioner and are carrying on the works} therein along^{with the land in Survey No219 l2l2' Insofar as the} land of the^{petitioneris concerned, no notification has been issued'} nor any compensation^{is being paid by the respondents'}

¶28

On behalf of the^{respondents,written instructionsdated} Og.7l.2O21 have^{been placed before this Court, and the same are} taken on record.

By the said written instructions, the respondents claim that the land in Survey No.2l9 l2l2 to an extent of Ac. 1.00 guntas \,a s acquired under the notification for the purpose of drarvl and Iifting of additional 1 . 10 TMC of water per day from foreshore of Sripada Yellampalli Project to drop into Mid Maniar Reservoir, after considering the claims under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,20l3.

¶33

Insofar the land of the petitioner admeasuring Ac. 1.01 guntas bearing Survey No.2l8l2/2 is concerned, the same has not been notified, since the land in question is not covered in alignment and no requisition has been received from the Requisition Department in respect of the said land. By the said instructions, it is also stated that as no requisition is received for the said land, the respondents did not initiate any acquisition process and therefore no compensation is paid to the petitioner. It is also stated that since the land of the petitioner is adjacent to land in Survey No.2l8l2l1, the petitioner is apprehending that his land would also be taken for the purpose of the project without acquiring the same. If the land of the petitioner is required for the above said project, necessary steps would be taken for acquiring the same by following due process of law.

¶34

7 . Having regard to the submissions made as above, since it is categorically stated by the respondents that the land of the petitioner is not being acquired by the respondents for the aforesaid purpose, no further orders are necessary in the writ petition, except observing that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from her land in Survey No.2l8l2l2, situated at

Velgatur Village and Mandal, Jagtial District, wirhout following the due process of law.

¶39

Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to approach this Court, in the event, the respondents try to dispossess her under the guise of the notification issued.

¶40

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶41

To,

¶42

//TRUE COPYII

¶43

SD/.N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR hY.-'

¶44

SECTION OFFICER

¶45

¶46

2.3. iHt{iif$qffi:v,5&',:t3,93i,.:i:f,",",ixis,.}s:sAcqustonDepartment'6Lirl;?... Acquisftion Officer/The Revenie Divisionat Officer, Jagtiat, Jagriat 4. The Tahsildar, Velgatur Mandal, Jagtial District.

¶47

9n" 99^{to sri Koidadin;ay xJmifl'ndioi"i!'iopucr} 6. s ta te of 7. +5: i,! ; i%li?6:iit"*: i6"rP,";i;' G;; ; a :"r idh EXi,.t to. t n " Resistrations' Hish court ror the state or B. +;St?3f"fFJ:""T:[i30!5 9. One Spare Copy CHR

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 011112021

ORDER

W.P.No.17079 of 2021

1 kiE 5l.A r€:
(
0 2 t)EC 2r',lpl zo
-l
9e.!oATC.:t

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

Billakuri Padma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Billakuri Padma v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Heeralal, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Venkateswara Oil Mill Vs State of Telangana

Billakuri Padma Vs The State of Telangana

Vankudothu Vijaya Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

M/s Arush Enterprises Vs The State of Telangana

Sudarshan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana