Dismissed

Kanuri Family Trust, repby its Chairman Sri Murali v. The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (Huda), Paigah

Telangana HC19 Oct 2022WP/26418/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana heard multiple writ petitions challenging the Outer Ring Road alignment affecting the petitioner's land, including disputes regarding land acquisition notifications and an amended act. Counsel submitted the petition had become infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous without costs.

Kanuri Family Trust, repby its Chairman Sri Murali Vs The… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^32es ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TEL/\NGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisd iction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTI_I DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TIVENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:26418 OF 2006

¶8

Between:

¶9

Kanuri Family Trust, rep.by its Chairman Sri Murali, Kanuri S/o KLN Prasad R/o H. No. 291, Road No.25, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-33

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority^(HUDA), Paigah, Palace, Rasoolpura,^police Lines, Secunderabad repby Vice Chairman.

¶13

The Project Director, outer Ring Road-cum-Special Collector,^(Land Acquisition), HUDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.

¶14

Special Deputy Collector^(Land Acquisition) unit Vl,, Outer Ring Road Project HUDA,Tarnaka Hyderabad.

¶15

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by Principal, Secretary^(Municipal Admn & Urban Development) Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶16

M/s. GEl. Godavari Engineering Limited, Muttangi Village,, Patancheru Mandal, Medak District.

¶17

M/s. Sandvik Smith Asia Limited (Previously Known as, Widia lndia Limited) Muttangi Village-502319, Patancheru madnal, Medak District.

¶18

M/s. Aarvi Associates, Engineering Consultants for HUDA, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad.

¶19

.,.RESPONDENTS

¶20

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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction under Art.226 of the Constitution fo lndia and declare:

¶21

A) the Notification issued Under Sec. a⁽¹⁾ of the Land Acquisition Act in ORR No. 108, dated 21-4-2OO5 relating to ac. 4-07^guntas, belonging to^{petitionerand}

¶22

situated in Sy.Nos. 118 and 119 of It4uttangi Village, Patanr:he-u lt4andal. l\iledak District'

¶23

B) the Notification r rsued Under Sec. 4 (1) of the Land Acqr silion Act in ORR No. 80, dated 11-5 2006 relating to ac. 0.19^gutas, belonl;in( t,)^p,ltitioner and situated in Sy.Nos. I^.18 and^'1 19 of It4uttangi Village, Palanr;he'u lv|andal, Medak District'

¶24

C) The Draft Declar rtion issued under Sec. 6 of the Lanrl AcrrL is tior Act in ORR No. 27 dated 18-4. 2006 relatingto ac. 3-38 guntas belonginc. t()^p{)titioner and situated in Sy No. 118 and 119 Muttangi Village, Patanche-u lr,4andal lr,4edak District

¶25

D) the alignment⁽ f outer ring Road made in Novenr ber/Der:em rer 2005 at Muttangi Village, se lment of Patancheru Mandal, l!4edak Distri,l.

¶26

E) the alignnrent c. outer ring Road made in April 2006 al Nluttangi Village, segment of P::tanct eru Mandal, Medak District.

¶27

F) And declare Anr hra Pradesh Act No.23 of 2008 cal ed tlrr, lanrl Acquisition (Andhra Pradesh Ar rendment) Act, 2008.

¶28

as illegal, arbitrar\ and malafide exercise of power done rr,ith intention of securing benefit to espondent Nos. 6 and 7 by deletion of :he r ancs measuring Ac.4-G % gts and Ac. 6-36 guntas respectively situated in S'' tlo. 121 and 172 of respondent No. ) and Sy.Nos.109, 110 and^{'1 '15} of Re;prndent No.7 of Muttangi Village, f atancheru lvlandal, Medak District and i s vio ative of the rights granted to he petitioner under Articles 1 4, 19 (1 )iq) 300(A) of the Constitution of lndi r and consequently direct lhe concerned resporrdents to lay and construcl the⁽ uter Ring Road in accordance with the aliJnme rt made and finalized in the ye; r^'1994-96 al the crossing of Muttangi Vllli:rge on National Highway No. 9 of P rtancheru Mandal, tvledak District.

¶29

WPMP. NO: 8145 C:: 2007

¶30

Petitio r under Section 151 CPC praying that in thr: circumstances stated in the affidr vit filed in support of the petition, the H gir C curt may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropria e wri' or direction under Art.226 of thr Constitution of lndia and declare.

¶31

A) the Notification ssued Under Sec- 4 (1 ) of the Land AcqL isition Act in ORR No. 108, dated 21- -2005 relating to ac. 4-07 guntas, belongirg io petitioner and situated in Sy.Nos. 118 and 119 of Muttangi Village, Patanchr ru Mandal, [\4edak District'

¶32

B) the Notification ssued Under Sec. 4 (1) of the Lancl AcqLis tion Act in ORR No. 80, dated 11-f 2006 relating to ac. 0.19 gutas, betongin I to petitioner and situated in Sy.Nos.^{'1 '18} and 119 of Muttangi Village, Patanchr,ru Mandal, Medak District'

¶33

¶34

C) The Draft Declaration issued under Sec.6 of the Land Acquisition Act in ORR No. 27 dated 18-4-2OOO relatingto ac. 3-38 guntas belonging to petitioner and situated in Sy No. 1'18 and^'1 19 Muttangi Village, Patancheru lVandal IVedak Distrrct

¶35

D) the alignments of outer rrng Road made in November/December 2005 at lvluttangi Village, segment of Patancheru lvlandal, t,4edak District.

¶36

E) the alignment of outer ring Road made in April 2006 at N,4uttangi Village, segment of Patancheru Mandal, t,4edak District

¶37

as illegal, arbikary and malafide exercise of power done with intention of securing benefit to respondent Nos. 6 and 7 by deletion of their lands measuring Ac. 4-G^y. gts and Ac. 6-36 guntas respectively situated in Sy No. 121 and 172 of Respondent No- 6 and Sy.No.s 109, 110 and 115 of Respondent No.7 of Muttangi Village, Patancheru lvlandal, Medak District and as violative of the rights granted to the petitioner under Articles 14, tO (t Xg) 300(A) of the Constitution of lndia and declare G.O.Ms.No.459 Revenue (L.A.) dated 8 April 2005 published in The Andhra Pradesh Gazirtte No.21 7 dated 12 April 2OO7 issued by the Special Chief Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh (Revenue Department) Secretariat, Hyderabari as violative of the provisions of Sec.3-A of the Land Acquisition Act and consequently direct the concerned respondents to lay and construct the Outer tting Road in accordance with the alignment made and finalized in the year 1994-96 at the crossing of N/uttangi Village on National Highway No. 9 of Patancheru Mandal, Medak District.

¶38

WPMP. NO: 33994 OF 2007

¶39

Petition under Section 151 CPC^prayingl that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to advance the hearing of WPMP No. 30683 of 2007 in WP No. 26418 of 2006.

¶40

WPMP" NO: 24906 OF 2008

¶41

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 permit the petitioner to bring on record in this WP No. 26418/2006 the Opinion given by Sri Justice P.A. Chowdary (Retd.) on 13-08-2008 on the legality of G.O.Ms. No. 459 as Revenue (LA) dated Bth April, 2005.

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms.MANISHA for SRI B.V.SUBBAIAH

¶43

Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI V.MANOHAR

¶44

Counsel for Respondent No.4:^{SRIPARSAANANTHNAGESHWAR RAO,} GP for Municipal Admn. & Urban Dev'^{for ADVOCAE GENERAL}

¶45

¶46

Counsel for Respond )nt No.6: SRI VIVEK JAIN

¶47

Counsel for Respond )nt Nos.5 & 7: None Appeared

¶48

The Court made the I ;llowing: ORDER

¶49

I I I

¶50

\ \

¶51

I'lllr I ION'BLlr^'IHll CFIIEF It;^'tl ELJ AL I][I AN t) 'IHE HON'BLE SRI IUSl'I(] Irr (..\1.!,}JASK L{ BrrDr)Y

¶52

Y.P.Nq,26ql3^(,i10116

¶53

RI)ER. 4'er t/E ttL'n'bb tt,:^.-li e.l J u ti, L.tjia / ts lt r!1u n I

¶54

Flcard N,Is. Manisha, learned c()Lrnsel [<rl thc puutioncr;

¶55

Mr. '.N{anohar, lc?rrne d counscl ltrr rcspondcnts N()- 1 t() 3; and N'lr. Irarsa Ananth Nageshwar I{ao, learr-red^(}overnment Pleacicr xttached r() the oflfice of tl-rc learncd .'\c]r'ocatc Ccrreral appcaring frrr respondcnt No-4

¶56

l,carr-red counscl [or thc pctitr()ncr subrnirs ttrat the wtit

¶57

pctition has bccomc infiuctuous

¶58

In vicw o[ above, this writ pctltion is clismissed as

¶59

infrucruous. No costs.

¶60

As a se<1uel, miscellaneous Petitions, Pending^{if any, stand}

¶61

LESHI tiismisscd SDI ----*-DEP lrrRuE^coPYll SECNON^{OFFICE R}

¶62

¶63

To,

¶64

*g3$:*lffi1il**r'::;:::::n

MRC tt-

HIGH COUR''

DATED:1911^t12022

ORDER

.4 1 rrE S I E
rt,,r
(1
-/
,: 7
L: n 2 'lrE[ ?[A o'l
.:- it
/

¶70

WP.No.2641B^{of 2006}

¶71

DISMlSSIIIG THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRL CTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

Kanuri Family Trust, repby its Chairman Sri Murali v. The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (Huda), Paigah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanuri Family Trust, repby its Chairman Sri Murali v. The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (Huda), Paigah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Krishna Babu, S/o Late C. Koteswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, repby

M/S. Classic Enterprises, Anup Ham Roy, Vs the Union of India, Govt of India, and Another

Jagdish Pershad Ladda, Vs Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Guna Complex

V.Brahmachari, Died per Lrs 2 to 7 R.R District and amp Another Vs K.Shankaraiah, R.R Dist and 7 Others

M/S.R.S.Rangadas Vs the Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S. R.S. Rangadas Vs the Asst. Commissioner of I.T. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad