The High Court dismissed the writ appeal filed by land owners challenging an order rejecting their claim for compensation regarding land acquisition for a dam reservoir project, upholding the lower court's decision due to delay.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL NO: 90 OF 2020
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent appealpreferred against the order dated 07-08-2019 passed in Writ Petition No. 16543 of 2019 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Appellant(s): SRI G. CHANDAN RAAJ
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: GP FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE THECHIEFJUSTICE AT H CHAN DRA SHARMA AND THE HON'B LE SRI JUSTICEABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL No.9O of2O2O
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice SatishChandr<t Sharma)
The present writ appealis arising out of an order dated 07.08.2019 passed bythelearned SingleJudge in W.P.No.16543 of 2019.
The facts of the casereveal that the appellants before this Court claiming as inamdarsof land admeasuringAc.O'15 guntas and Ac.l.13 guntas in SurveyNos.708 and 713 situated at Elgandal Village,KarimnagarDistrict, came up before the learned SingleJudge statingthat the possessionof the land was taken by theGovernmentfor construction of Lower Maner Dam Reservoir. Itwas stated that inampatta was granted to them and theyare the inamdars and therefore, they are entitled forcompensation. The facts further reveal that in theyear 1992, land acquisition proceedings were finalised, awardswere passed and compensation was paid to theland owners. In somecases, the matter was also subjected tojudicial scrutiny in O.P.No.92 of 2OO4 and orderswere passed enhancingthe compensation. The present appellants,on the strengthof some photocopies, were claimingthemselves to be patta holders and the learned Single Judge hasdismissedthe writ
:
petition, as after 27 yearc the writ petition was preferred claiming themselves as patta holders by way of inam patta.
In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Single Judge was certainly justified in dismissing the writ petition. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. The miscellaneous applications pending , tf any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
SD/.M.VIJAYA BHASKAR DEPUTY REGISTBAR //TRUE COPY' l'-/' SECTION OFFICER
To,
NPJ
NPJ
1r<v
;
HIGH COURT
DATED:1810112022
ORDER
WA.No.90 ot 2020
1 r\E. S IAf €
k
q
co 02 FtB 2022 {,
.L
,nt ic
@ CJdt) t_<br>.\ KV
\ *"
DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL
WITHOUT COSTS.
Shetti Ramaiah, Shetti Shankaraiah, Shetti Chinna Rajaiah
State of Telangana
Satish Chandra Sharma
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
