Allowed

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

Telangana HC22 Feb 2023WP/30928/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the inaction of Land Acquisition Officers in referring a petitioner's claim for individual reference under Section 64 of the LARR Act, 2013, directing the segregation of the application from a group reference within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to refer the petitioner's application dated 03.08.2021 as an individual reference by segregating it from the group reference within four w

M/s. Amrutha Sai Stone Crusher Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s6l

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY,^{THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEMUMMINEN!SUDHEER} KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30928 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Amrutha Sai Stone Crusher, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Narendar Reddy, S/ o. Malla Reddy, Aged about 45^years, Occ. Business, Fl/o. H.No.134/1, Ranapur Village,^Palakurthi Mandal,^Peddapalli District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue^(Land Acquisition) Department, Secretariat-BRK Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Jagityal District, Collectorate Building, Jagityal.

¶13

The Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagityal Revenue Division, Jagityal District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

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 Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents more particularly 3rd respondent in not referring the Award No.6/2021 (pertaining to the petitioner at Declaration Serial No.165) passed vide Proc.No.E/384/2020- VELGATOOR, dated 18.06.2021 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 03.08.2021 , 03.08.2021 and 17.O1.2022 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

¶16

Act, 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to make an independent reference (pertaining to the petitioner at Declaration Serial No.165) 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 Dectaration Serial No.165) to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation 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: ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR ; LAND ACQUISITION REPRESENTING ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

f-r

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WRIT PETITION 8 of 2o22

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

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

¶26

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not referring the application/representation submitted by him under Section 64 of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2ol3 (for short the Act, 2oL3), pursuant to Award No.6 of 2O2t in proceedings No.E/3g4 /2O2O_ vELGATooR, dated 18.06.2021, in respect of the land of the petitioner to an extent of Acs.3.Oo in Sy.No.32T /A/1 situated at Velgatoor village and Mandal, Jagtial District, as individual reference.

¶27

It is not in dispute that the award was passed and the petitioner received compensation amount of Rs. l,Bs,zr,6sglfor its land of Acs.3.00.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that instead of making individuar reference of the apprication of

¶29

¶30

the petitioner filed under Section 64 of the^{Act-, 2013,} a^joint reference 'nvas made by the respondent^{No.3 along rvith} 195 claimants, which is contrary to the^Circular Dis. No. 1 07 / LARRA / PO / H^yd' I^{2022, dated 28.Og.2022.}

¶31

5 The reading of the above circular^{makes itclear that} individual reference has to^{be madeby the Land Acquisition} officers. In any case, since^{the petitioner has filed a.n} application individually^{for refereuceunder Section 64 of the} Act, 2013, the respondent^{No.3 cannothave anlr objection tbr} making individual reference.

¶32

Learned Assistant Government^{Pleader forLand} Acquisition submitted that^{the application of the petitioner for} reference under Section 64^{of the Act was sent along with a} group of 195 claimants.^{Ho-wever, due tosome technical} objections, the reference^{applications were returned by the Land} Acquisition, Rehabilitation^{and ResettlementAuthorityand after} complying with the objections,^{the applicationshave been again} referred to the Authority^{by the Lancl Acquisitionofficer.}

¶33

However, as discussed above,^{since the petitionerhas} individually submitted application for reference under Section 64 of the Act, 2013, the respondents are bound to entertain the

' ,'/

an lt

reference application submitted by giving individual case number.

¶38

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to refer the application of the petitioner, dated o3.o8.2o21, under section 64 of the Act, 2ol3 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 any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶40

To,

¶41

SD/. P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTBAR //TRUE COPY/ e/ SECTION OFFICER

¶42

The Principal Revenue Acquisition )^{Department, Secretariat,} BRK Bhavan, State of 2. Jagityal. 3 Jagityal

the State of

6 TJ

HIGH COURT

DATED i2210212023

ORDER

.No.30928 of 2022

{ vrE S'l"e IA=
q
t
o
2g tlAH 2023
t .i'| .) -"ir

¶51

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Amrutha Sai Stone Crusher 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

B. Devender Reddy 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