Allowed

Smt. M.Anasuya v. The State of Telangana and2 others

Telangana HC23 Nov 2021WP/552/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a Writ Petition challenging the delay by the Land Acquisition Officer in referencing an application for compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The court directed the authority to refer the matter for adjudication within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.3 to make a reference under Section 64 or 76 of the Act within two weeks.

Smt. M.Anasuya Vs The State of Telangana and2 others — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE Ar xvoSJfJIooF^{rE LANGANA} (Speciat Originat Uuriiaictionl

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVENIBER TWO THOUSAND ANO rWEr.rri

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

Between:

¶7

WRIT PE TITION N O: 552 O F 2021

¶8

Smt. M. Anasuva. W/o. lal_e M.prasad Raju, Aged 72 years, Occuoation. Househotd R/o.^ptot No.17a, nouii ivoITEl.:rtliE; frily!)Hyderabad _ 5oo 033

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

r irv r/sr vev s'[i

¶12

1. The State of Telanoana fep by its principal Secretary (Revenue Department) ^^{9-R.K.Bhavan, Saiiabad.Hvoeiiuaa}

¶13

The District corector, nqngh Reg{y oistrict, At Lakdikapoor, Hvderabad 3. The Division, La n d Ran!a Aco u i s Reddy Districtiti o n offi c6 r, a no iiere n ii"' ti i"-i i. "li'oTti.""'r'irr j;;;;;;rs*

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High cou.t ina"v uu pr"usuo to issue interim directions, directing the 3rd Respondent herein to refer the application/ petition dated 2610212020 of the petitioner filed undel. s""tion o+ ir I or the Right to Fair compensation and rransparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to competent Authority for measurement and adjudication of compensation payable to person interest and determination of proper market value for the acquired land admeasuring approximately 1000 Sq. yds out of Ac.1-00 Gts. in sy. No.124 situated at Gopanpally (Village), berilingampalty (Mandal), Ranga Reddy (District).

¶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 issue interim directions, directing the 3rd Respondent herein to refer the application/ petition dated 2610212020 of the Petitioner filed Under Section 64 (1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to Competent Authority for measurement and adjudication of compensation^payable to^person interest and determination of^proper market value forthe acquired land admeasuring approximately 1000 Sq. Yds out of Ac.1-00 Gts. in Sy. No.1 24 situated at Gopanpally^(Village), Serilingampally^(Mandal), Ranga Reddy (District).

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N. PRAVEEN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP^{FORLAND ACQUISITION}

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

SRI^JUS TICET. VINO DK^UMAR THE H^ON 'BLE WRIT TION No. 552 oF2^o2],

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

the action^{of the3'd} This Writ^{Petitionis filed questioning} respondent^{in not making reference to the competent Authority} under^{Sectton 64(1) of theRight to Fair ComPensation and} on and^Resettlement Transparency^{in Land Acquisition' Rehabilitati} d,tt 26.02.2020^filed Act, 2013^{(for short 'the Act')' the application} by the^{petitioner in respectof the land acquisition awarddated} O8.O7.2()lg^{whereunder various extents of lands were acquiredfor} improvement^{of baiance 16 Radial roads of Ranga ReddyDistrict'}

¶23

Despite^{the matter havingbeen adjournedon 19 01'2021 to} enable the^{learned GovernmentPleaderfor LandAcquisition for} filing counter,^{no counter affidavit is filed as of today Hence' the} Writ Petition^{is taken up for hearing and disposal'}

¶24

Petitioner contends^{that beingaggrieved by the Award} passed by the 3'd respondent^{in acquiring the landsand fixing the} compensation,^{videproceedingsdated Oa'O7 2019, the petitioner} had requested the^{said authority to make reference underSectlon} 6a⁽ 1) of the Act^{and submitted application on 26 02 '2O2O'} However, inspite of^{lapseof more than a year, the 3'd respondent} authority did not^{make anyreferenceto the authorityas prescribed} under the Act,^{thoughbeingbestowed with such power'It is} contended that^{failure to makereferenceon the part of the said} respondent is rn clear contravention^{of the powers conferredunder} the Act

¶25

¶26

per contra, learn ed Government pleader appearing for the respondents, wh,e not puting the fact of the a representation seekin relerence ur'ra.. s."rijiT::fi:; wourd submit that there to the rana anal as such, the authority .,:; X.T;:: - *"J lulsrcnce under Section 64 of the Act.

¶27

Be that as it m2y, as the petitioner had submitted a representation seeking reference under Section 6a(1) of the Act, and if the respondent had received any objection to the acquisition of land and payment oI compensation to the petitioner who had sought for reference being macie under Section 64 of the Act, the authority was otherwise duty bound to make reference with regard to apportionment of compensation under Section 76 of the Act to the authority. Mere existence of a dispute between the parties would not absolve the liability of the respondent in not making a reference either under Section 6a(1) of the Act or T6 of the Act depriving the actual beneficiaries from receiving the compensation.

¶28

In view of the above, the Writ petition is allowed and a writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent No.3 to make a reference either'under Section 64 or Section 76 of t.ne Act as the case may be within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed

¶30

SD/.T.TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR iiTRUE COPY// \ ,/ SECTION,O):.FICER

¶31

To,

¶32

1 The Principal Secretary (Revenue Department), State of Telangana, B.R.K.Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, At Lakdikapool, Hyderabad

¶33

3 The Land Acquisition Officer, and Revenue Divisional Officer Rajendranagar Division, Ranga Reddy District

¶34

4 One CC to Sri N. Praveen Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] E Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶35

A Two CD Copies

¶36

One Spare Copy SM Atir

HIGH^COURT

DATED:2311112021

ORDER

WP.No.552 ol 2021

tlE
/,
; tl lP NliT rl
a------.-:2'

¶43

ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶44

v A,\}
A<br>

Smt. M.Anasuya v. The State of Telangana and2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. M.Anasuya v. The State of Telangana and2 others

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

Karam Anantha Ramulu Vs The Special Deputy Collector

Sadala Chandra Reddy Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Nalluri Subba Rao Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

M/s. Savitridevi Polyfabrics (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Telangana

M/s. Yash Agencies Vs State of Telangana and Another

T. Vani, Mahabubnagar District Vs Secretary, Panchayatraj Dept., Hyd and 6 Others