Landowner alleged respondents sought to dispossess her from plots beyond the extent acquired under an award for a rifle range. Respondents said they possessed only the awarded land. Court disposed of the petition permitting her to seek a survey; if excess occupation is found, proceedings must follow in law.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[32e6 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 8952 OF 2009
Between:
A. Siva Lakshmi Devi, D/o. Vasudev Reddy, Aged 37 years, Occ: Employee R/o. 8-3-819/29 and 21, Sai Heaven Apartnientsl Nagarjuna Nagar,
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 an appropriate writ or direction particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents in trying to disposes the petitioner from the lands in Plot Nos. 59 to 66, 74 lo 81 , 82 to 89, 101 to'108 in Survey No. 137, 140, 141 of Badangipet Village, Saroor Nagar I/landal, Ranga Reddy District without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary.
(Prayer is amended as per C.O. dated 29.09.2010 in WPMP No.26498 of 2010)
l.A.NO:1OF2009 (WPMP . NO:1 1709oF2009)
Petitionunder Section151 CPC prayingthat in the cir cumstancesstated may be Pleasedto intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourt t Nos.59 to 66, 76 directtherespondentsnottodisposesthepetitio,nerfromPlo BadangPetVillage' to 81,82 to 89, 101 to 108 in Survey No 137'140'141 of ng due Processof SaroorNagar Mandal,Ranga Reddy District withoutfollowi law,pending disposalof the writ petition
r.A. NO: 20F2010 (WPM P. NO:32757 0F2010)
in thecircumstances stated Petitionunder Section 151 CPC praying that gh Court maYbe Pleasedto in theaffidavitfiled irr support of the petition' the Hi in PlotNos. 59 to 66, 74 to directthe Sth responCent not to make construction 141 ofBadangiPet Village' 81,82 to89' 101 to'108 in Survey No 137' 140' ng disPosalof the main writ SaroorNagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Districtpendi petition.
Counselfor the Petitioner:SRI N' ASHWANI KUMAR
Counselfor the Respondent No'1 to 4: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
Counselfor the RespondentNo'S: SRI GADI PRAVEENKUMAR' oi. soltcrroRGENERAL oF INDIA
The Courtmadethe following:ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRi JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRTT PETITIONNo .8952 of 2OO9
ORDER:
This Writpetition is filed praying this Court to declare the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the lands in plot Nos.59 to 66,74 to 81, 82 to 89, 101 to 108 in Sy.Nos.73T,I4O and, i41 of Badangipet Village, Saroor Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, without following due process of law as illegaj and arbitrary.
tl
2
CVBR, J Wp 8952_2009
benefit ofrer;pondent No.5 for the purposeof riffle rumge lt is the furthrlrcase of the petitioner that though her name was mutated inthe revenue records, in the notrfication issued und<:rSectiona (1) of the Act, the names of the vendors of thepetitioner was shown as owners of the property and soonafter coming toknou' about the notificatior-r. thepetitioner has made a representation to pay the cornpensationand accordinglyaward rn'as passed and competrsationwas paid to himAs per the aq'ard plot Nos.lO9 to 114,130 to135 admeasuring24OO square yards r.r,as acquired.The grievalce of the petitioner is that the resportclentsinstead oftaking possession ofthe acquired land i.e',2400 square yards, are makingeffortsto dispossess herfrom the other lands which have been purchased by her underregisteredsale deeds'
3
CVBR, J Wp 8952 2Oo9
Ranga Reddy District, for Devathala Gutta, Riffle Range for (DMRL) situated at Badangpet Vilrage. It is arso the case of the respondents that after publication of the draft declaration, pattadars of Sy.Nos. I22, l2Z to 131, 134 and 135 total admeasuring Ac.Bg.0g guntas, have filed W.P.No.16765 of 2006 challenging the acquisition proceedings and the said writ petition was dismissed on 14 .08.2006. Aggrieved by the same, the pattadars also filed W.A.No.l150 of 2006 and, this Court allowed the said writ appeal " setting asid_e the ord,er passed. in W.p.No. 1 6765 of 20O6 and the proceedings taken by the respondents therein after issue of notifi,cation under Section a(1) of tLLe Act are quashed. Howeuer, libertg tuas giuen Lo t he competent authoity to hold enquirg und_er Section 5_A of the Act and take fi.nat decision, after giuing reasonable opportunity to the landholders to submit objections. If the objectors request for personal heaing, ttLen the competent authoritg shall afford them such heaing before taking final decision." It is the further case of the respondents that in pursuarce of the directions issued in writ appeal, enquiry
4
};
: i;;
CVBR, ] Wp_89 52-2009
und.er Sectioli5-A of the Act was conducted and having heard theob..ectionsof the interested persons, fresh draft declarationunderSection6oftheActwaspublishe'dand after conclurllngthe award enquiry anau'ard'dated 24.O3.2OOAitid.e proceedrngs No'B/162 l2OO2-1 has been passed dividing thetotal land ofAc'l2l'32guntas into categories ie.,agriculture lands admeasuringAc' 100 18 guntas in S1,'.Nos.723,124, 126, 133, l37,l4Oand 141 aiit agricultureland convertedinto plots ie'' A<:'2174 guntas in Sy.Nos.137and 140 It is the further case of the respondents thatthey are in possessionof the respective land acquire d uideaward, dated 24'03 2OOaand they are not interferingwith the part of the land belongingto the petitioner,q hichwas purchasedby the petitionerb1' rvay of rcgisteredsz.Jedeed.
CVBR, J Wp_89s2_2009
conduct survey of the land owned by her, which is forming part of the very sarne survey numbers, which was acquired by the respondents, in which event, the respondents are directed to conduct survey and if it is found that the respondents are in encroachment/occupation of excess iarrd, which was not acquired uid.e award, dated 24.O3.2OO8, the respondents are directed to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
6 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, ,pendingshall stand closed
SD/-V.KA VITHA //TRUE coPYil ASstsTA NT EGISTRAR
To
1 R 2 3. 4. 5. 6 7. 8. o GJP \t)
HIGHCOURT
DATED:0510912024
ORDER
WP.No.8952of 2009
.u-- \l, -_
( o ir ,,1
(
ac
0 E jAN ?11:
t
o.A'iir,i;r-r ,i-,'. -.:
lq
DISPOSINGOF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS
*w\$
A)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondents could dispossess the petitioner from lands beyond those acquired under the award dated 24.03.2008 without due process.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
A. Siva Lakshmi Devi
The Govt. of A.P., Revenue Department
The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (Industries)
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Saroor Nagar
The Tahsildar, Saroor Nagar
The Director, D.M.R.L.
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
