Disposed

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani v. The Government of Andhra PRadesh

Telangana HC1 Apr 2024WP/2253/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Special Deputy Collector to entertain claims by the petitioners within two weeks and decide them within four weeks in accordance with Sections 31(1) and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, disposing of the writ petitions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to entertain claims within two weeks and decide within four weeks.

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani Vs The Government of Andhra… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

IMONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos.2253 AND 2258 OF 2012

¶7

WRIT PETITION No.2253 OF 2012:

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani, W/o Sri. Prakash Chand Aswani, Housewife C/o^H.No 1-1-26119, First Floor, Musheerabad, Hyderabad.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, h.p. Uy its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶13

The District Collector, Hyderabad.

¶14

Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition,^{GreaterHyderabadfVunicipal} Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Greater Hyderabad ll4unicipal Corporation, Rep. by lts Commissioner, having its office at Tankbund Road, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that^{in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court may be} pleased to issue Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of [Vlandamus, declaring the action of the^{respondents in ignoringto} calculate the compensation for land^{in the awarddated. 16.07.2011and in not} releasing the compensation to the^{petitioner againstthe land acquisition} proceedings initiated vide AA No. 830/2008 in respect of the^{petitioners property} and interfering with the rights of the^{petitioner in H.No.1-1-261l9,First Floor} admeasuring 1025 sq. ft^(undivided share^{of 55 yds) situated at [t4usheerabad,}

¶18

¶19

Hyderabad as berng. illegal, arbitrary, u nco nstitutio na I and contrary to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (amended Act 6B/1984) apart from being in contravention of the principles of natural .justice and consequently direct the respondents to rectify the mistake in the award by adding compensation for land and release the compensation to the petrtioner and take possclssion of the said property.

¶20

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP. N O: 2803 OF 20121

¶21

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 respondents to interfere with the rights of the petitioner in H.No. 1-1261l9, First Floor situated at [\r]usheerabad, Hyderabad, pending the disposal of the writ petition.

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.2258 OF 2012

¶23

Between:

¶24

Shri Prakash Chand Aswani, S/o. Sri Late Kishan Chand Aswani, Aged 52 years. Occ: Business,

¶25

¶26

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani, W/o. Sri Prakash Chand Aswani, Aged 47 years, Occ: Housewife

¶27

Both R/o.H.No. 1-1-261 19, 1't Floor, [t/usheerabad, Hyderabad.

¶28

...PETITIONERS

¶29

AND

¶30

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶31

¶32

The District Collector, Hyderabad-

¶33

3 Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Greater Hyderabad [\rlunicipal Corporation, Hyderabad

¶34

4 Greater Hyderabad [,4unicipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Having office at Tankbund Road, Hyderabad

¶35

...RESPONDENTS

¶36

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 a Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of l\4andamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not releasing the

¶37

¶38

compensation to the petitioner as per the award daled- 1610712011^passed against the land acquisition^proceedings initrated vide AA.No.830/2008 in respect of the petitioners property/mulgie and interfering with the rights of the petitioner in H. No. 1-1-26116, Ground Floor situated at fi,4usheerabad, Hyderabad as being illegal, arbitrary, u ncon stitutional and contrary to the^provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (amended Act 68/1984) apart from being in contravention of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to release the compensation to the^petitioner as^per the award daled.^161011201 1 and take the possession of the said property.

¶39

l.A. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 2808 OF 2012)

¶40

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^may be^{pleased to direct} the respondents not to interfere with the rights^of the^{petitionerin H.No.1-1-26116,} Ground Floor situated at [/lusheerabad, Hyderabad,^{pendingthe disposalof the} writ petition.

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner in both the Writ Petilions: SRI^{V. M. M. CHARY}

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.¹ to 3 in both^{the Writ Petitions:}

¶43

GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 in both^{the Writ Petitions:} SRI D. NARSIMULU, STANDING COUNSEL FOR GHMC

¶45

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶46

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶47

WRIT PETITION Nos.2253 and 2258 of 2OL2

¶48

COMMON ORDER:

¶49

Heard both sides and perused the record

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in these two vrrrit petitions is similar 1_o the order passed in W.P.Nos.30653, 30654 and 30689 of 2Oll and this Court disposed of the said batch of writ petitions by an order dated 21. I 1.201 1 and requested to pass similar orders in these two writ petitions as lvell.

¶51

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 has not disputed the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶52

In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, both the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to entertain the clarms of the petitioners, if made rvithin a period of tq,o rveeks from the date of reccipt of a copy of this order. If such claims are

¶53

¶54

s. ,J W.P.Nos.22S3 aod,22SB of 2Ot2

¶55

made, he shall hold enquiry and take appropriate decision in

¶56

accordance with the provisions of Section 31 (1) and 31 (2) of

¶57

the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, within a period of four (04)

¶58

weeks thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶59

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

¶60

stand closed.

¶61

SD/.V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTR.AR //TRUE COPY// ,/V SECTIONTOFFICER

¶62

To,

¶63

The Specral Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Greater^{Hyderabad Municipal} Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶64

One CC to SRI V. M. IV. CHARY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶65

Two CCs to GP for Land Acquisition, Highbourt^{for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶66

One CC to SRI D. NARSIIVULU, Standing Counsel^forGHTVC [OPUC]

¶67

Two CD Copies

-l

HIGH COURT

DATED:0110412024

1 HE S TA)' s
'r
oo 12 JUL ()
Tt oi:i'r!\ r(:.1

¶74

COMMON ORDER

¶75

wP.Nos.2lsg nNo 2258 oF 2012

¶76

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONS

¶77

WITHOUT COSTS

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani v. The Government of Andhra PRadesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jaya Prakash Aswani v. The Government of Andhra PRadesh

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

Sridevi Banothu Vs The State of Telangana

Chinnapelly Rajitha Vs Statae of Telangana

Smt. Banavath Padma Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Sharfuddin Ahmed, Vs The Grampanchayath, Turkala Mohamadapur Village

Katta Veakat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Ch.Rani Vs The State of Telangana