Allowed

Baddam Lakshma Reddy, v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC12 Sept 2024WP/26077/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a writ petition filed by Baddam Lakshma Reddy. The petitioner sought a mandatory writ declaring the respondents' interference with his land construction illegal for lack of due process. Without a counter-affidavit, the Court directed the respondents to cease interfering with the petitioner's possession until due legal procedures under land acquisition laws a

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's property without following due process of law; petition disposed.

Baddam Lakshma Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{K, SARATH}

¶6

WRlT PETITION NO: 26077 OF 2018

¶7

Between:

¶8

Baddam Lakshma Reddy, S/o. Narayana, aged 42 years, Occ. Business,^Rio. H No. 4-65, MadhapurVillage, Korutla^Ma ndal, Jagityal District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana,^{rep. by rts Princrpal Sgcretary, Panchayat Rajand} Rural DevelopmentDepartment,^{Secretarrat,Saifabad. Hyderabad}

¶12

District Colleitor Panchayat^{Wing, Jagityal District at Jagityal} 3. District Panchayat Officei,^{Jagityal Drstrict at Jagityal.}

¶13

a. Crjrj Pancytiayat rep by" iis^{PanchayatSe6retary, Raikalvillage and} Mandal, Jagityal District.

¶14

Mandal, Jagityal District.

¶15

s.^{go;m;fanii 'Ram} Mahesh,^{S/o.RamaChandram,aged 55 years,Occ'} Business, R/o. H. No. 11-87,^{Srilatha Medical Hall, Gandhi Chowck, Raikal} Village and Mandal, Jagityal District.

¶16

...RES'ONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226^{oI the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filedtherewith,the High court may be} pleased to lssue a writ, order or direction^{more particularly one in the natureof} wRlT oF MANDAMUS to^{declarethe impugned actionof 4th respondentat the} instance of 5th respondent^{in interferingwith the constructionwork madeby the} petitioner in the land an extent oI^{281.42sq. yds ln Survey Number35/AA} situated at sivar^{for Raikal Villageunder the limits of Raikal GramaPanchayat} without following due^{procedure as illegal, irregular, arbitrary}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶19

Petition under section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High court may be pleased direct} the respondents not to interfere^{in any mannerin to the petitionerspeaceful} possession and enioyment and construction over^{his landadmeasuring 281 42} sq. yds. ln Survey Number 35/AA^{situated at sivar for RaikalVillage under the} limits of Grama Panchayat,^{pending disposal of the Writ Petition}

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI M. VIJAYAKUMAR GOUD}

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos. 'lto3: GPFOR PANCHAYAT} RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI^{G. NARENDER REDDY, SC}

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.S:-

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.26O77 OF 2018

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for follou,ing relief:

¶30

". . .to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more^{prtrtianlarlg} onein the nature of Wit of Mandamus to declare the impugned action of 4th respondent at the instance of^Sth respondent in interfering uith the construction u.tork made by the petitioner in tLrc land an extent of 281.42 Sq.^{Yards in} Surueg No.35/AA situated at Siuar for Raikal Village under the limits of Raikal Grama Panchayat uLithout follouting due procedtre as illegaL, and irregular.. ."

¶31

Fleard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant^(]overnment Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and learned Standing Counsel lor Gram Panchayat appearing for the respondents, and perused the entire material on record.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitiorrer submits that admittedly this Court has granted interim order on 26.O7.2018, directed the respondents not to interfere^with the possession of the petitioner.

¶33

In spite of lapse of more than six (06)^{years, the} respondents neither filed^counte r-afficlavit^norvacalo

¶34

¶35

petition denying thc averments made by the petitioner in the urrit affidavit. ln view of the same, requested this Court to allow the u,rit petition

¶36

In vicr.r, of the submissions made by the learned counsel lor the petitioner ald on perusing the entire material on record, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose ol the un'it petition, directing the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner's property without following due process of law. If the respondents want to acquire the land of the petitioner, they have to follow the proceclure as contemplated under the Right to Fair Compcnsation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitatior-i ancl Resettlement Act, 20 13.

¶37

With tl're above direction, this Writ Petition 1S disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous Applications, if any pending in this u,rit petition, shall stand closed

¶39

SD'- N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// :) SECTION OFFICER

¶40

To,

¶41

I The Principal Secretary,^{PanchayatRaj and Rural Development Department'} ' secretariai, Saifabad. T.S,Hyderabad' , iX;'6i;i;;j Collector^{pancnaG Wing Jagityal District at Jagityal} 5 +ij; 6;;il;i^{Frnin"vrt officei,Jasitv-alDi'trictat Jaoitval}

¶42

The Panchayat^{sec,etaiv,'6"r;;;H;th;vainair<ai'/illagea nd Mandal'} JagitYal District.

¶43

+^d|----

¶44

One CC to SRl. lV. VIJAYA KUIMAR GOUD, Advocate [OPUC] 6 Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶45