Disposed

Mrs. Habeeba Sultana v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Sept 2024WP/20535/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representations regarding land classification and compensation under the RFR&RA 2013 within eight weeks, as the award remained unpassed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector to consider petitioner's representation on compensation and classification under Section 23 of the Act within 8 weeks.

Mrs. Habeeba Sultana Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I^32s6 l

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR^REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETI TION NO: 20535 OF²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mrs. Habeeba Sultana, Wo. Nayeem^Aktar, Aged 51 years, Occ: House^wife, Rio H.No.2-2-175l'l,Shaipur Road,^Tandur ,^{Vikarabad District. Telangana} State

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by^{its Principal Secretary to the Government,} Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings,^Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The District Collector, Vikarabad District,^{lntegrated Collectorate Complex,} Pargi Road, Vikarabad, Telangana state.

¶13

3 The Land Acquisition Officer, and Revenue^{Divisional OfficerTandur Revenue} Division, Vikarabad District, Telangana^state

¶14

The Tahisildar, Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad^{District. Telangana state}

¶15

The Executive Engineer, Roads^{and building Department,VikarabadDistrict} Telangana state.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the^{constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court maybe} pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction(s)^{particularly one in the nature of writ} of Mandamus declaring the highhanded^{actionof the Respondentsin taking over} the possession of the land from^{petitionerto an extent of Ac.0-15 Guntas in} sy.No.248ll and also an extent of^{land in Ac.0.09Gts in sy,No.250/U, totalling} Ac.0-24 Gts, situated at chengole^{Village, TandurMandal,Vikarabad District for} the formation of Tandur^{bypassroad, in pursuance of the Notice dated} 26.10.2017 vide Proceedings No.B/12012017,^{issued undersection 21 of the Act} No.30 of 2013, without^{following due process of law as illegal and arbitrary}

¶18

resulting in violation^{of Article14, 21 and 300-4 of the constitutionof India and'} setasidetheSameandconsequentlydirecttheRespondentstofollowdue process of law-

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶20

Petition under section^{151 cPC praying that in the circumstancesstated} intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto direct the respondents^{not to proceed with the Tandur bypass Road work in an} extent of Ac.0-15^{Guntas in sy.No.248lland also an extentof land in Ac.0.09Gts} inSy.No.250/U,totallingAc.o-24Gts,situatedatChengoleVillage,Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad^{Districtin pursuanceof the Notice daled 26.10.2017 vide} ProceedingsNo.B1202017,issuedunderSection21oftheActNo.30of2013.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI DILIP SINGHTHAKUR}

¶22

Counsel for the^{Respondents:GP FORLAND ACQUISITION}

¶23

The Court made the^{following: ORDER}

¶24

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.2O535 of 2o23

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner, seeking the following relief:

¶29

"....to issue a utrit, Order or Drection{s)^{particularly one} in the^{noture of} Wit of Mandamus declaring ttLe hightnnded action of the Respondents in taking ouer possession of the land from petitioner to an ertent of Ac.O15 Guntas in SA.No.248/ I and aiso an ertent of land in Ac.0.O9 Gts tn Sg.No.250/U, totalling Ac.0- 24 Gts, situated at Chengole Village, Tandur Manda| Vikarabad District for the formation of Tandur bgpass road, in pursuance of tle Notice dated 26.10.2017 uid"e Proceedings No.B/12O/2017, issued under Section 21 of the Act No.3O of 2013, tuithout follouing due process of laut as itlegal and arbitrary resulting in uiolation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of Indta and set aside the same and consequetltlA direct the Respondents to foLlotu due process of law..."

¶30

It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.00 gts in Sy.No.24B and Ac.l.33 gts in Sy.No.250 situated at Chengole Village, Tandur Mandal, Vikarabad District, having purchased the same under registered sale deeds dated 30.05.f 996, 06.05.1996 and 23.12.1999. It is further case of the petitioner that for the purpose of formation of Tandur bypass road from KM O/O to 12/0 KMS, the respondents have issued preliminary notification dated 03.07.2017 under Section 1 1 of the

¶31

¶32

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2O13 (for short "the Act") and thereafter, issued notice dated 25. ll.2ol7 under Section 21 of the Act. It is the case of the petitioner that she participated in the award enquiry and requested to pay compensation basing on the market value of commercial land i.e, per square yard basis. However, the respondents, through a Negotiation Committee, determined compensation of Rs.¹ 5 lakhs and Rs. 18 lakhs per acre for agricultural land, which she disagreed with. It is further case of the petitioner that despite submitting representations on 07.06.2021 and 31.05.2023, seeking compensation based on market value per square yard, no action has been taken by the respondents.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents are attempting to take^possession of the^petitioner's property without paying adequate compensation as required under the provisions of the Act. It is argued that even though the^petitioner has submitted representations dated 07.06.2021 and 31.05.2023^to the respondents, till date, the^{respondentshave not taken any action}

¶34

On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents submitted that acquisition of the petitioner's land was initiated as part of the project for formation of Tandur bypass road from KM O/O to l2lO Kms. It is -

¶35

I I

¶36

¶37

further submitted that the preliminary notification was published in the Telangana Gazette on 03.07.201T arrd no objections were received under secrion 15(1) of the Act within the time stipulated. The petitioner participated in the award enquiry and raised objection regarding the classihcation of the land, and refused to give consent in Form E-1. As such, the award was not passed in respect of the petitioner's land and possession was not handed over to the requisition authorities.

¶38

¶39

In view of the above submissions, as the petitioner has raised objections concerning the classilication of her land as agricultural land and requested to pay compensation basing on the market value applicable to commercial lands and further, as the award has not yet been passed by the respondent No.2 and possession of the land was also not taken,. this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.2 to consider the representations dated 0Z.06.202I and 31.05.2O23 submitted by the petitioner in terms of Section 23 of the Act and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶41

"_\

¶42

¶43

As a^{sequel thereto' miscellaneouspetitions' if any' pending}

¶44

shall stand^{closed' No order as to costs'}

¶45

¶46

SD/. K. SREE RAMA MURTHY //TRUE COPYil ASSISTANT l REGISTRAR "/ SECTION OFFICER To,1 The Princigar secretary to the Government, Revenue Department, secretariat -^{Buildings, The State of Telanqana, UvaeranjO. -} 2. ^^i.rrsj The District^Road, coilector^Vikarabad vikarab"ad^{r;6;dn;;i;i;: "'-} oistri,:i-rni;qiated collectorate complex, 3. . The^Division, Land^Vikaiabad Acquisition^District, officer, Telanoana 5nd Revenue Divisional stat. -oistrict - - - officer Tandur Revenue Telangana state t IP J3!q1iprr-,lrr"dur^{Mandat, Vii"rioio} c. r ne trxecurrve hngrneer, Roads and buirding Departmentl Vikarabad District Telangana state. 9 9f !!^{t9 s1,p1rioSingh Thakur, Advocate} IopUCI / ' two ccs to GP for l and Acquisition. High court for ihe state of rerangana, at Hyderabad [OUTI 8. Two CD Copies TJ LS

HIGH COURT

DATED:1110912024

ORDER

WP.No.20535 of 2023

1HE Sl,t r€
(
(
C)
(J 0 I JAtl 2025 z ti
JC)
<br>oSsonrt:

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT^PETITION

WITHOUT COSTS

0rof'

*{-

Mrs. Habeeba Sultana v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Habeeba Sultana v. The 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

K. Prameela, R.R. Dist. and Anr. Vs Prl. Secy., Infrastructure and INVESTMENT(IID-2) Dept and 2 Ot

Abood Bin Hussain, Adilabad Dist. Vs the Dist.Collector, Adilabad Dist., and 3 Otrs.

Dr.Penagamuri Chandra Sekhara Babu Vs The Union of India

M.N Upendra Nath Vs The Union of India

M/s. Ramakrishna Teletronics Private Limited Vs The Assistant Director

Koti Raghunatha Rao Vs The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India