Disposed

B. Nagesh, v. The Special Deputy Collector (Lao)

Telangana HC29 Jan 2024WP/12776/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged payment of land acquisition compensation to respondents 4 to 7 without considering their objections. The Government submitted that the matter was referred to the Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and compensation deposited. The writ petition was closed with liberty to pursue the matter before the civil judge.

What the court decided

AI extract

B. Nagesh, Vs The Special Deputy Collector (Lao) — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

HIGH^{COURT FOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶3

IIONDAY. THE^{TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYFOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K, SARATH}

¶6

WRIT PETITI^{ONNO: 12776 oF 2010}

¶7

Between

¶8

i. B Nagesh,^{S/o Chinoa Savaranna,aged about 55 years'}

¶9

,) B Anlaneyulu,^{S/o ChinnaSavaranna agedabout 30 years'}

¶10

(Both are resident^{at Marlabeed Village' Dharur Mandal} Mahabubnagar Dtstrrct).

¶11

..PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

'1 The Soecral Deputy Collector rLAOI^{Jawahar Lrft lrrlgatron Prolect (JLIP)'}

¶14

{Nette'rnpad^{) Gadwalluahabubnagar ulstrlcr}

¶15

Tl'e Revenue^{Divtstonal Officer'GadwalMahabubnagarDistrict}

¶16

:r^{Tne TahsildarGhattu MandalMahabubnagarDrstrict}

¶17

4 Smt^{Narsingamma. S/o Govindu Rio' MarlabeedVillage Dharur lvlandal'} l,4ahebubnagar^Distnct

¶18

i Peclti;; Narsimhulu^{S;o Gcvlrrdu R/o Ma'labeedVillage Dharur Mandal} l.lahabubnagar^Distri't'

¶19

6 Nadipr^{Narsimhulu, S/o' Govindu' R/o' IrilarlabeedVillage' Dharur Mandal'} [Vlahabubnagar^Dlstrrct

¶20

; Nlareppa Sro GovtnCu^{Rio' MarlabeeclVillage Dhartrr IVlandal'} fu1ahat)ubnagar^Dlstrlcl

¶21

rResDondents^{4 to 7 hereinare R/oMarlabeedVillage Dharur Mandal'} Mahibubnagar^District)

¶22

..,..RESPONDENTS

¶23

i-.trtron Under^{Article 226 of the Conslltution of lndiapraylng that ln the} crrcL llstances^{stated in the affrdavrt filedtherewiththe Hrgh Courtmaybe} pleased to lssue^{a Writ order or dlrectlon more partlcularlyone in the nature of}

¶24

Wrrt of L,landamus. declarinq rne actron of the 1''r respondent ln trytng to^pay the conrpi:rsation amount rn respect of the land in Sy No.58 and 59 srtuated at Thurimala Cheruvu Vrllage Savar of Ghattu lvlandal, lvlahabubnagar District in favour of the respondents 4 to 7 wrthout considering the objection petition filed by the i)ctrtroners daled 27'4-2010. as bad, arbitrary. illegal and u n constitutional and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to conduct enquiry and pay tlre compensatron amount to the petitioners in respect of the said lands. t.A.NO:1 OF 2010^{(WPMP.NO:16105} OF 2010)

¶25

'iatrtron^{Under Sectron 151 CPC prayrngthat rn the crrcLjrnstances stated} in tire affrdavrt filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein not to pay the compensation amount to the resiicricients 4 to 7 herein rn respect of the land tn Sy. No 58 and 59 situated at Thui;:-r3ia Cheruvu Vrilage Sivar oI Ghattu lt/landal, [/ahabubnagar Dastrict pending disposal of the above writ petrtion.

¶26

Corrnsel for the Petitioners : SRI C.DAMODAR REDDY

¶27

Courrsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 7 : SRI A.RAVI BABU

¶29

The Court made the following ORDER

¶30

, II

¶31

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.L2776 OF 2O1O

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the^petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition^for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri A.Ravi Babu, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 and^6.

¶34

Learned Government Pleader for^Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.l to 3 submitted written instructions and stated that in view of the objections raised by the petitioners, the matter^was referred to the Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal^under Section 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act,¹⁸⁹⁴ and deposited t1le amount of Rs.31,28,680 I^{- through} cheque bearing No.608792, dated 19.06.2O1O.

¶35

In view of the instructions submitted^{by the} learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition^for respondent Nos.1 to 3, no further orders^{are required}

¶36

to be passed in this writ petition and accordingly, the

¶37

writ petition is closed with a liberty to the petitioners to pursue the matter before the Senior Civil Judge,

¶38

Gadwal. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

As sequel to it, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any

¶40

pending, shall stand closed.

¶41

I t

¶42

SDI. N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT.REGISTRAR\ //TRUE COPY// '/ v). SECTION OFFICER

¶43

¶44

1 -i v.;o CCs to GP For [-and Acquisition. Hrgh Court for the State of Telangana i Hyderabad [OUTj

¶45

2 ,)ne CC to Sri C Damodar Reddy Advocate IOPUC]

¶46

:; One CC to Sri A Ravr Babu, Advocate {OPUCI n Ivro CD Copies

\ \

HIGH COURT

DATED:2910112024

ORDER

itlr

WP"No.12776 of 2010

CLOSING THE W.P

WITHOUT COSTS.

@.,04 go

B. Nagesh, v. The Special Deputy Collector (Lao)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

B. Nagesh, v. The Special Deputy Collector (Lao)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maruthi Industries Vs The State of Telangana

F. T. F. Traders Vs The State of Telangana

Pasham Sanjay Babu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

A.Janardhan Gupta, Vs The District Panchayat Officer

Sri Nookala Varun Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Naveena Constructions. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh