Ummareddy Bharathi Vs State of Telangana

3 The Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, For the State of Telangana, At CCLA Permises, Abids, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Registrar

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavil filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direclion more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 herein in not referring the Award No. Ni'1/2015-16, File No. B/1 3/2009-l-Abadi, dated. Nil-02-20'16 pertaining to the Petitioner property's / structures bearing H.No. 1-20 and 'l-21 situated at Cheerlavancha Village, Sircilla .lVlandal (Presently Thangalapally Mandal) Rajanna Sircilla District, under Section 64 of Act 30 of 2013 to the LARR Authority, at Hyderabad for enhancement of compensation pursuant to the application dated. 25-05-2016 (Acknowledged on 26-05-2016) as illegal, arbitrary, unfair, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14, 2'1 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and contrary to the Provisions of Act, 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 herein to refer the Award No.

¶16

r

¶17

Ni1/2015-16, File No. B/13/2009-l-Abadi,^{dated.Nil-02-2016 pertaining to the} Petitioner^property's /^{structures bearingH.No.1-20 and 1-21. situatedat} cheerlavancha Village. sircilla^{Mandal(Presently ThangalapallylVlandal)Rajanna} Sircilla District,Under Section 64^{of Act 30 of 2013 to the Respc,ndent No. 3} herein for enhancemr:nt of compensation^{in terms of the application dated. 25-05-} 201 6 (Acknowledged orr 26-05-2016).

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstarrces statedin} the affidavit filed in support of^{the petition, the High Court may be pleased to} direct the Responderrt No. 2 herein^{to refer the Award No. Nil/20'15-16,File No'} B/13/2009-l-Abadi, cated. Nil-02-2016^{pertainingto the Petitioner property's /} structures bearing tl.No.^{1-20 and 1-21, situatedat cheerlavancha village,} sircilla lvlandal^(Presently Thangalapally^{Mandal) Rajanna sircilla District,Under} Section 64 of Act 30 of 2013 to^{the Respondent No. 3 herein for enhancementof} compensation in tertns of the application^{dated. 25-05'2016(Acknowledgedon} 26-05-2016) pending disposal of the^{WritPetition.}

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI B.ARJUN RAO

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: ASST. GP FOR^{LAND ACQUISITION}

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

i l l i l I

¶24

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶25

Writ Petitioa No.1O285 of 2025

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This writ petition has been filed to declare the action of the respondent No.2 herein in not referring the A-ward No.Nil/2O1516, File No.B/13/2009-I-Abadi, dated Nii.02.2016 pertaining to the petitioner's property/structure bearing H.No.1-20 and l-21 , situated at Cheerlavancha Village, Sircilla Mandal, Raj alna Sircilla District (subject property) under Section 64 of Act 30 of 20 13 to the LARR Authority, Hyderabad for enhancement of compensation pursuant to the application dated 25.O5.2O16 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct respondent No.2 to refer the above said award for enhancement of compensation in terms of application dated 25.05.2O16

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of respondents

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Government had proposed to construct Mid Manair by acquiring agriculture lands and dwelling houses/ structures. The subject

¶30

ii2,i

¶31

property ol tlre petitioner has also been acquired ort 20.or.2olr u.ithout girirLg any prior notice. According to General Award dated Nil.12.2016, petitioner was anvarded an amount of Rs.21,49,3,37l- (for H.No.1-20) and Rs.10,53,272l- (for H.No.1_ 21). The nrain grievance of the petitioner is that respondent authorities h ave wrongly calculated the dwellin13 area arld structure vahre of the petitioner,s property and undervalued the same. In that regard, petitioner has made a representation on 25.05.2O 16 . As there was no response forthcoming, the petitioner is, before this Court by way of this writ petrtion.

¶32

Though various grounds are raised in the urit petition, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his praye.r seeking a direction to respondent authorities to dispose of the petitioner,s representation dated 13.O4.2016 in a time bound period. 5. Le amed Assidtant Government pleader for Land Acquisition submits that if the said representation is still pending for consideration, the respondent authorities may be directed to dispose of the petitioner,s representation, dated 25.05.2076 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law

¶33

i'I I I i I

¶34

3

¶35

6 In view of the submission made by the learned counsel on either side and without going into the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the petitioner,s representation, dated 25.05.2016 and pass appropriate orders strictry in accorda.ce with raw by foilowing Section 64 of Act 30 of 2013, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after grvrng a fair opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶36