Dismissed

Mohd. Azeemuddin and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Telangana HC16 Feb 2023WP/2673/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition questioning land acquisition proceedings due to alleged incorrect identification of possession holders. It directed authorities to consider the petitioners' objections and compensation claims within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to consider objections and compensation claims within six weeks.

Mohd. Azeemuddin and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁵⁶ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:2673 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mohd. Azeemuddin s/o Late Mohd. Khairuddin, Age 60 years, Occu. Civil Contractor, H.No. 3- 4 -225, Sawaran Street, Karimnagar.

¶10

Mohd. Yusufuddin, s/o late Mohd. Khairuddin, age 55 years, Occu. Business, residing in H.No. 3- 4- 225, Sawaran Street, Karimnagar.

¶11

Mohd. Khaja Moinuddin, s/o late Mohd. Khairuddin, age 49 years, Occu. Private Employee, H.No. 3- 4 -225, Sawaran Street, Karimnagar.

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The State of Telangana , Rep. by Principal Secretary to Government Land Acquisition, BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶15

2 The District Collector, Mancherial District.

¶16

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Cum Land Acquisition Officer, Mancherial, District Mancherial.

¶17

4 The Tahsildar Revenue Mandal Mancherial, District Mancherial. 5 The Municipal Council Mancherial Municipality, Rep. by Commissioner, ffice of Municipality Mancherial, District Mancherial.

¶18

t) Dr. Meka Vijay Mohan Reddy, s/o late Ram Mohan Rao, age 56 years, Occu. Medical Practitioner, Madhava Nursing Home, Ambedkar Road, karimnagar.

¶19

7 Meka Goutham Reddy, s/o late Ram Mohan Rao, age 51 years, Private^- Employee, H.No. 6- 92, Utkoor Chowrasta, Uthkur Luxettipet Revenue Mandal' Mancherial District'

¶20

...RES,.NDENT.

¶21

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 Writ of Certiorari in calling for file No.C2021416512021 and file No.A/'|356/2022 on the file of the office of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in initiating action for acquisition of land in Sy.Nos.208 and 209 measurin! to an extent oi 1815.Sq. Yds equivalent to 15 guntas situate within the limits of the office of respondent No.S for payment of compensation to respondents 6 and 7 by publishing notification by publication in Mancherial Distrlct Gazette No. 1012022 dt. 1310412022 under Sec. 11 and District Gazette No.29 of 2022 dt. 2310812022 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act. 2013 as bad, illegal, arbitrary, opposed to principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Sec. 1 1 and Sec.^'19 of Act No.30 of 2013 violative of Art. 300-4 Constitution of lndia consequently to

¶22

quash the Gazette Notification No.10 12022 dl. 1310412022 District Gazette No.29 of 2022 dt.23lOBl2O22

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶24

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including passing award pursuant to the notification issued under Sec. 1 1 and Sec. 19 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement^Act, 20'13 published in District Gazette Manchrial No.10/2023 dt.^{1310412022 and} No.2912022 dl- 2310812022 respectively^pending disposal of^{writ petition}

¶25

lA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleasedto} issue directions to respondent No.5^{not to develop 80 ft X 320 ft Road proposed} in TP No.24l75 from West to East^{measuring2845 Sq. Yds in Sy.Nos. 208 and} 209 situate at Manchrial^{properas shown in the Lay out plan connectingthe} State High Way 120 ft to Asifabad^{pending disposal of the writ petition}

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioners:^{M/s. C. ROHINI SMITHA}

¶28

Counsel for the Respondents^{No.1to5: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION}

¶29

Counsel forthe Respondents^{No.6&7: None Appeared}

¶30

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶31

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR trrRIT PETITION No.2673 of 2023

¶32

,ORDER:

¶33

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents

¶34

This Writ Petition is frled questioning the notification, dated i3.04.2022 issued under Sub Section (1) of Section l1 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabiiitation and Resettlement Act, 20 13 (for short,^,the Act 30 of 2Ot3J in File No.A/ 1356/2021, proposing to acquire the land situated in Survey Nos.208 and 209 of Mancheriyal Village and Mandal, Mancheriyal District, notifying the names of respondent Nos.6 and 7, as persons in possession of the subject property.

¶35

According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are the absolute owners and possessors of the subject property, which is proposed for acquisition, under the impugned notification, but not respondent Nos.6 and 7. As the names of respondent Nos.6 and 7 are notifred as persons in possession of the subject property and entitled for compensation, the petitioners filed the present writ petition questioning the action of respondent No.3 in notifying the names of respondent Nos.6 and 7 in the preiiminary notification. It is also further contended by learned counsel for the

tl I

petitioners that on notrclng the said error in the impugned notiftcation, r he petitioners l-rave submitted a representation, dated 03 01 2023 before respondent Nos.2, 3 and s. The said representation is still pencling consideration and respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 are not considering the said representation on the ground that there was an order passed bv a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.39837 of 201 S, as conhrmed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 1249 of 2O16 directing payment of compensation in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein.

¶40

I'lo doubt, the iearned Single Judge of this Court by an order, dated 17 .O8.2O 16 directed the respondents therein to initiate proceedings for acquisition of land of the petitioners, therein under the Act 30 of 20 13 and pay compensation to them within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the said order was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court.

¶41

The petitioners herein are not parties to the said writ petition and the learned Single Judge of this Court having considered the claim made by the petitioners in the said writ petition, passed the said order. As the petitioners herein are not parties to the said writ petition, the said order is not binding on the petitioners herein.

¶42

In the light of specific contention raised by the petirioners herein that the land belonging to them, in fact, is getting effected by the impugned acquisition proceedings but not the rand

¶43

r.<:4]

¶44

¶45

belonging to respondent Nos.6 and 7 and also taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have already raised their objections by submitting representation, dated O3.01 .2023 before respondent Nos.2, 3 and S seeking payment of compensation to them, the respondents are under obligation to consider the said representation or objection filed by the petitioners wh e conducting an enquiry under Section 15 of the Act 3o of 2013 on its own merits.

¶46

7 . Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition at this stage and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the objections raised by the petitioners and also their claim for payment of compensation in respect of the subject property proposed for acquisition submitted through their representation, dated o3.o1.2023, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

¶48

shall stand close

¶49

¶50

SD/-P.CH.NAGABHUSHAM BA ASSISTANT GISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

¶51

To,

¶52