Dismissed

S.Sugunaker Rao v. The District Collector

Telangana HC21 Sept 2024WP/2423/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition seeking enhancement of land acquisition compensation. The petitioner had expired, and after issuing notices to revive the petition with their legal representatives, the court dismissed it as infructuous due to lack of application for LRs.

What did the court decide?

That Legal Representatives of petitioners may file application seeking revival of petition.

S.Sugunaker Rao Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³²⁹⁶ ]

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

SATURDAY,^{THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FOUR}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY}

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:24^{23 0F 2009}

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 S.Sugunaker Rao,^{S/o.BheemRao Agriculture R/o'Bheemini'Adilabad} District.

¶10

2 H"ffi^'n"r"na, S/o. Ralesham^{Agriculture R/o. Bheemini,Adilabad District.}

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The District^{Collector,Adilabad District, Adilabad'} i. iil [;;acquiitiion'^{oErcer,suo-torector,Asifabad,Adilabad District.}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article 226 of the constitution of lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be} pleasedtoissueawritordirectionmoreparticularlyinthenatureofwritof Mandamus declaring^{the action of the respondents in not consideringthe} applicationsofthepetitionersdated30.T.1996andT.3.lgg6forreferringthe matterstotheCivilCourtunderSectionlBofLandAcquisitionActfor enhancementofcompensationinrespectoftheacquiredlandsofthepetitioners toanextentofAc.,l.20gts.inSy.No.l2TandanextentofAc.0.T5centsinSy.No. 126 respective^{situated at Bheeminishivar, Bheemini Village,Adilabad District'is} illegal,arbitrary,unjust,violationofArticles2land300-4oftheConstitutionof lndiaandcontrarytotheprovisionsofLandAcquisitionActandconsequentlyrefer the matters^{for enhancementof compensation in respect of the above lands'}

¶16

I.A. NO:¹ OF²⁰⁰⁹

¶17

P. NO:30^{92 0F 2009}

¶18

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleasedto}

¶19

consider the applications dated 30.7. i 996 and 7.8. 1 996 of the petitioners for referring the matters to the civil court under section i 8 of Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation in respect of the acquired lands of the petitioners to an extent of Ac.1 .2tJ gts. in sy.No.127 and an extent of Ac 0.75 cents in sy.No. 126 respective situated at Bheemini shivar, Bheemini Village, Adilabad District, pending disposal of writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI VENKATESHWAR VARANASI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

,// /./ /,/ - L

¶23

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY}

¶24

WRIT PETITIO^{N No.2423 of2OO9}

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

When the matter^{wastaken up for hearin g on 21} '06'2024, it was informed that^{the counsel appearing for the petitioners} expired long back.^{Therefore,this Court issued notices to the} petitioners to enable^{them to} ]engage^{the counsel to prosecute} their case.^{Today,when the matter is taken up, there is no} representation on^{behalfof the petitioners'Notices issued by} this Court were^{returned with an endorsement that the} petitloners exPired.

¶27

Since, there is no^{appropriateapplication to bringthe} L.Rs. of the deceased^{petitioners on record,this Writ Petitionis} dismissed as infructuous.^{In the event,if any cause survives for} artjudication in this writ^{petition,the legal representatives of the} petitioners are at liberty to^{file an appropriateapplication} seeking revival of this^{writ petition in accordancewith law'} There shall be no^{orderas to costs.}

¶28

Pending miscellaneous^{applications, if any, shallstand}

¶29

closed.

¶30

SD/. P. CH.^{NAGABHUSHAMBA} ASSISTAN R ISTRAR

¶31

//TRUE COPY//

¶32

SECTION OFFlCER

¶33

To 1 The District^{Collector,Adilabad District, Adilabad .} 2 ii;; i;; ;;;isiiion'^{onicei, sub{ollector'Asifabad' Ad i la badD istrict} 43 d""'CiU i;; dd.'i"-ci'ron 5Hi^{VEr.irniESHwnR} -r-qr'ro acQUlslrloN,^vARANAsl, Hish^Advocate court for the^toPupl state^. or Telangana,^{at HYderabad.} [OUT] 5 Two CD Copies PSK. LS 5

HIGH COURT

DATED:21109t2024

ORDER

WP.No.2423 of 2009

a S TA I F
q
c 1,6 JAN 2[25 .b2o
I
t
DEllp.nJc

¶40

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS. gc"t'l ffit

S.Sugunaker Rao v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sugunaker Rao v. The District Collector

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.B.Prashanth Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Dhanikonda Mahalaxmi Vs The Sub Collector (Revenue Divisional officer)

Oruganti Posani D/o. Narayana Aged bout 39 years Vs The State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary

D.Govinda Rao Vs The Government of Ap., rep.by its principal Secretary

Nampalli Yakaiah, Vs The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Grade

Lone Tulasibai Vs The Special Deputy Collector / Land Acquisition Officer