Allowed

B. Devender Reddy v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Feb 2023WP/30915/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the High Court's direction to refer his land acquisition claim under Section 64 as an individual case rather than a joint reference. The Court observed the circular requiring individual recognition and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to segregate and refer the application individually within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to make an individual reference of his application under Section 64 within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

B. Devender Reddy Vs State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²⁵⁶ ]

¶2

i 1 r i I

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY THREE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 30915 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

B. Devender Reddy, S/ o. Prabhakar Reddy, Proprietor of M/ s. Sri Sai Ram stone crushers,. {g"g.about lf ygars, occ. Business, R/ o. Ranapuiv,ttrg", Palakurti Mandal, Peddapally Disirict.

¶11

...PET|T|ONER

¶12

AND

¶13

state of relangana, Rep. by its principar secretary, Revenue (Land

¶14

^^{4."qqtqition)Department,Secre_tariat,BRKBhavan, Hyderabad.} 2. The District Colle.ctor, Jlgityal District, Collectorate'Bdilding, Jigityat. 3. The Land Acquisition Offi-qeiland Revenue Divisional Offic6i, .li"gifyaf Revenue Division, Jagityal District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

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 Call for the records from the respondents and issue an appropriate a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents more particularly 3rd respondent in not referring the Award No.612021 (pertaining to thei petitioner at Declaration Serial No.186) passed vide Proc.No.E/384t2020- VELGATOORI dated 1g.06.2021 to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Hyderabad U/Sec.64 of Act, 30 of 2013 though the petitioner had filed applications / representations within the stipulated time as.specified under Act, 30 of .2013 before the 2nd and 3rd respondents on 26.07.2021,26.07.2021 and 01.09.2021 respectively as illegal, arbitrary, unfair, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and contrary to the Provisions of Act, 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to make an independent reference (pertaining to the petitioner at Dectaration Serial No.186) to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Hyderabad U/sec.64 of Ac, 30 of 2013

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

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 3rd respondent to make an independent reference (pertaining to the petitioner at Declaration Serial No 186) to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilftation and Resettlement Authority, Hyderabad, U/Sec.64 of Act, 30 of 2013, pending disposal of the above Writ petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. PRABHAKAR CHIKKUDU

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION FOR ADDL

¶21

ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

1 I I i

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.3O915 of 2022

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Land Acquisition representing learned Additional Advocate General

¶27

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not referring the application/representation submitted by him under section 64 0f the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2or3 (for short 'the Act, 2or3,), pursuant to Award No.6 of 2O2t in proceedings No.E/384 /2O2O_ vELGATooR, dated 19.06.2021, in respect of the land of the petitioner to an extent of Acs.1.20 guntas in Sy.No.33g/3 situated at velgatoor village and Mandal, Jagtial District, as individual reference.

¶28

3' It is not in dispute that the award was passed and the petitioner received compensation ainount of Rs.I,49,0 g,grt I - for his land of Ac. 1.20 guntas.

¶29

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that instead of making individual reference of the application of

¶30

¶31

the petitioner filed under^{Sectiol64 of the Act, 20 13,} a joint refercnce was^{made by the respondent No.3 along with} 195 claimants,^{which is contrary to theCircular} Dis.No. LO7 ILARRA/PO lHydl2022,^{dated 28.O3.2022:}

¶32

The reading of the^{above circular makes itclear that} individual reference^{has to be made by the Land Acquisition} officer. In^{any case, sirrce thepetitioner has filed an} application^{individually for referenceunder Section64 of the} Act, 2013,^{the respondent No.3 cannot have a.ny obiectionfor} making individual^reference.

¶33

Learned Assistant^{Government. Pleader forLand} 6, Acquisition^{submitted that the appiication of the petitionerfor} reference under^{Section 64 of the Act, 2Ol3 '*'as sent along with} a group of^{195 claimants. However, due to some technical} objections,^{the reference applications werdreturned by the Land} Acquisition,^{Rehabilitationand Resettlement Authorityand after} complying^{with the objections,the applications have beenagain} r:eferred to the^{Authority by the Land Acquisition officer.}

¶34

However, as discussed^{above,since the petitioner has} individually submitted application for^{referenceunder Section} 64 of the Act, 2OI3, the respondents are bound to entertain the

¶35

¶36

t I

¶37

reference application submitted by^giving individual^case number.

¶38

In view of the above, the writ^{petition is aliowed and the} respondents are directed to refer the application^ofthe petitioner, dated 26.07.2021, under Section 64 of the Act, 2013, as individual reference by segregating it from the^group reference within a period of four (4) weeks from the^date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order^as to costs.

¶39

Miscellaneous Petitions, if &oy, pending in this writ

¶40

petition shall stand closed.

SD/.A.V.S. ASSISTANT

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION OFFICER

To,

Ilg TIil"ipfljggrgtary, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department,

¶46

_^{Secretariat,BRKBhavan,T.S.,Hyderabad.}

¶47

The District collector, Jlgitval DiStrict, coltectorate Building, Jagityal.

¶48

I!: lq r-o $cq u is ition officeir a nd Reven ue Divis ion a t omcEi, li-g if#i Revenue Division, Jagityal District.

¶49

Two ccs to GP FoRLAND AceulslfloN ,High court for the state of Telangana,at Hyderabad [OUTI

¶50

Two CCs to ADDL. ADVOCATE CeNeRnL ,High court for the state of

¶51

-^{Telangana,at Hyderabad[OUT]}

¶52

-^{Telangana,at Hyderabad[OUT]} 6. One CC to SRl. PRABHhKAR CH|KKUDU, Advocate [opUC] 7. Two CD copies BM LS,^---

HIGH COURT

DATED:2210212023

ORDER

1 \ g S'l^A rl:
^.
nu 2 g fli\n ?tul
*

¶57

WP.No.30915 of 2022

¶58

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶59

,/-<br>/
(_)
f\4,,/)--
6ff*

B. Devender Reddy v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. Devender Reddy v. State of Telangana

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

Aku Rama Devi Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

Mohd. Ujala Baba Vs The State of Telangana And Another

Gajjela Venkateshwarlu Vs The State of Telangana And 5 Others

M/s. Amrutha Sai Stone Crusher Vs State of Telangana

Sabavat Dhari Vs The State cf Telangana

Nakod Sanjeev Kumar And 5 Others Vs The State of Telangana And 4 Others