Disposed

Kammari Kamala v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jan 2025WP/20148/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding land acquisition under the LARR Act 2013, the High Court directed respondent authorities, whose declaration validity was extended, to consider objections filed by petitioners and other interested parties while passing the award and to communicate it to the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent authorities to consider objections from petitioners and unofficial respondents while passing the Award under Section 21 and communicate the same.

Kammari Kamala Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY^{OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW^FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD^KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 20148 OF 2024

¶9

Between:

¶10

Kammari Kamala, W/o Kammari^{Sadaiah, Age. 51 years,Occ. Housewife,} Fl/o. 6-62, Kairiguda, Goleti, Komuram^{BheemAsifabad.}

¶11

Takem Bheem Rao, S/o Takem^{Posham,Aged .41 years Occ. Agriculture,} Rl/o. 4-16, Rekulaguda,Goleti,^{Komuram BheemAsifabad.}

¶12

Urati Rambai, W/o Late Urati^{Posham, Age.68 years, Occ. Housewife,Rl/o 1-} 50i2, Goleti village, Rebbana mandal^{Komurambheemasifabad district.}

¶13

Takem Hanumanthu, S/o Takem^{Borraiah,Age. 63 years,Oc'c' Agriculture,} Rlio. 6-37,Khairiguda, Goleti, Komuaram^{BheemAsifabad}

¶14

Aqqila Akku Bai, W/o Aggila^{Bikku, Age. 68 years, Occ. Housewife'Ryo.6-60'} Khlirguda, Goleti, Komuiam^{Bheem Asifabad}

¶15

...PETITIONERS

¶16

AND

¶17

't. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶18

The District Collector,^{Komaram BheemAsifabadDistrict.}

¶19

The Revenue Divisional^{Officer cum Land Acquisition fficer,Asifabad,} Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶20

The Tahasildhar, Rebenna^{Mandal, KomaramBheem AsifabadDistrict.}

¶21

The General Manager,^{Singareni company colliries Limited, Bellampally,} Mancherial District

¶22

Kesari Kavitha, Dio Narayan^{Goud, Age.not known, Occ. housewifeRl/o} Goleti Village, ilebbena^{Mandal, Komaram BheemAsifabad district}

¶23

Durgam Venkatesh, S/o Mallayya,^{Age.not known,Occ.- agricultureRl/o Goleti} Villige, Rebbena Mandal,^{KomaramBheemAsifabad district}

¶24

Jadi Srinivas, Jadi^{Srinivas, S/o Lingaiah, Age.not known,Occ-. agricultureRl/o} Goleti Village, Rebbena Mandal,^{KoharamBheem Asifabad district}

¶25

Duroam Santosh, S/o^{HokatuAge.not known,Occ agricultureRio Goleti} Villa-ge, Rebbena Mandal,^{Komaram BheemAsifabad district}

¶26

I I ! I

¶27

l0 Durgam Somaiah. s/o Hokatu Age.not known, occ. agricurture R/o Goreti Vittase, Rebbena Ma nda i, 6;;;;m iiri;; isifa bad d istrict

¶28

1 1 ' Durgam sambaiah, s/o Hokatu Age.not known, occ. agricurture Rl/o Goreti Village, Rebbena Mandal, fomira-m afreriri isifabad district

¶29

12.Ko.rara Nagamma, wo.Ramaiah, Age. not known, occ. house wife Fi/o Goreti Viflage, Rebbena Manda t, fomaia ni ei neem' f sitaOad A is't-rici

¶30

'r 3' Pe-rugu Vsttar, s/o Lingaiah, Age.not known, occ. agricurture Rl/o Goreti Vi nase, Rebbena Mania t, 6nia-iam iitr6eni isiti oio oEirtci

¶31

Peruou Devamma.,W/o Durgaiah, Age.not known, Occ. house wife , Ri/o Goreti Viilage, Rebbena Ma;dal. k;fi;;"-r'ii'ri"", Asifabad district

¶32

Konala Mounika. D/o Rajender, Age.not known, -occ. house wife Rio Goleti Vi I tage, Rebbena l,ra no ai. ko m;;;il di;; ft if abad d istrict

¶33

16.Gouse Moinuddin. S/o Abdul Kareem, Age.not known, Occ. not known. Rl/o Goreti virage, nenoena tr,nind;r, 6;;r#'B;lrem Asifabad district

¶34

17 .Korala^pushoalatha, */o. Rajender, Age.not known, Occ. house R/o Goleti Vittage, Rebbena Minoar, tGm;;, bi"#; isifabad disrrict

¶35

lS Muniam Mafiava. s/o Narayana, Age.not known,_ occ. agricurture, Ri/o Goreti vilage, Rebbdna nlanoit. konri;;,- Bii;# A.irabad district

¶36

Durgam Shankarama, Wo Lingaiah, Age.not known, Occ. house wife R,o Goteti Vifiage, Rebbena Mr;d;[ ru;;%r-eh.u, Asifabad district

¶37

20.Jaadi Lachaiah. S/o Lasmaiah, Age.not known, Occ. agriculture , R/o GOleti Vilage, Rebbena Mandat, 6;a;; dh;i.l'Riitroro ot.tri"t

¶38

21 . SD. Mubharak. S/o Abdul.Rehman, Age.not known, Occ. agriculture Rl/o Goteti Vi,age, Rebbena n,rnArf ,-Xon.Zia," fiiil'", Asifabad districr

¶39

Z2'Chappidi Ganesh. S/o Mailayya, Agenot known, occ. agricurture R/o Goreti vittage, Rebbena Mandat, x6fordraii a'h;e;X;raora

¶40

Durgam Lachum bai, Wo.Govaraiah, Age.not known, Occ. not known. Rl/o Goteti Viilage, Rebbena t"tanoat, xoriii;'Eil;r" Asifabad district

¶41

...RESPONOENTS

¶42

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus decraring the action of the respondent No 2 to 4 in incruding the names of the respondents 6 to 23 in coilusion with them in possession column of the preliminary notification issued u/s 11 (i) of Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabiritation and Resetflement Act 2013 vide gazette No' g dated 3.6-2023 and notice issued u/s 21 No. Gt46712021 dated 3'1 '2024 for the agricurturar land of the petitioner No 1 in survey No 23olA extent

¶43

¶44

Ac Ac 4.O8 gts, land of the petitioner No 2 in survey No 230/8 extent ac ac 3.24 gts, Iands of the petitioner No. 3 in survey No 230/C extent ac 3.0'1 gts, the land of the petitioner No 4 in survey No 230/D extent ac 3.25 gts and land of the petitioner No. 5 in survey No 23'1lA extent ac 3.28 gts situated at Goleti village, Rebenna Mandal, Komurambheem Asifabad District without any basis/record and trying to pay half of the compensation without considering the representations dt 29.04.2024 and 8.7.2024 as arbitrary and illegal and in violation of article 14,16 and 300A of Constitution of lndia and also violate of the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and in violation of the principles of natural justice consequently direct the respondent No 2 and 4 to consider the representation of the petitioners dt 29.04.2024 dated 8.7.2024 and to pay entire compensation to the petitioners for the lands in survey no's petitioner No i in survey No 230/4 extent Ac Ac 4.08 gts, land of the petitioner No 2 in survey No 230/8 extent ac ac 3.24 gts, lands of the petitioner No. 3 in survey No 230/C extent ac 3.01 gts, the land of the petitioner No 4 in survey No 230/D extent ac 3.25 gts and land of the petitioner No. 5 in survey No 231/4 extent ac 3.28 gts situated at Goleti village, Rebenna Mandal, Komurambheem Asifabad District.

¶45

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶46

Petition under Section^'1 51 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 Respondent 2 to 4 not to disburse any compensation to the respondents 6 to 23 for the lands in survey No 230/4 extent Ac Ac 4.08 gts, land of the petitioner No 2 in survey No 230/8 extent ac ac 3.24 gts, lands of the petitioner No. 3 in survey No 230iC extent ac 3.01 gts, the land of the petitioner No 4 in survey No 230/D extent ac 3.25 gts and land of the petitioner No. 5 in survey No 231lA extent ac 3.28 gts situated at Goleti village, Rebenna Mandal, Komurambheem Asifabad District without considering the representations of the petitioners dared 29.O4.2O24 dated 8.7.2024

¶47

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI GUDI MADHUSUDHAN REDDY

¶48

Gounsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 4: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

¶49

Counsel for the Respondent No.S: SRI P. SRI HARSHA REDDY, SC FOR SINGARENI COLLIERIES LIMITED

¶50

Counsel for the Respondent No.7,9,10, 13, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22 and 23: SRI P. LAKSHMA REDDY,

¶51

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶52

¶53

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶54

WRIT PETITION No.2O148 OF 2024

¶55

ORDER:

¶56

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, Sri P. Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Collieries Limited appearing on behaif of respondent No.5, Sri I). Lakshma Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for rcspondent Nos.7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16, f8, 20,2I,22 and 23 and pcrused thc record.

¶57

The case of the petiriont:rs, in brief, is that the respondent authorities by issuing preliminary notification dated 25.05.2023 and declaration dated 25.O8.2023 under Secrion l9 of Right to Fair Compensation, and 1'ransparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Reser.tlemcnt Act, 2O 13 (for short^.the ActJ are seeking to acquire various cxtents of lands in Goleti village, Rebenna Mandal, Komuram bhecm-Asilabad District.

¶58

Petitioners furthcr contend that though the respondent authorities have issued noticc under Section 21 of the Act on O3.OI.n24 directing the pe rsons interested to appear before the Authority on 10.O1.2O24 and even though the petitioners have appeared on the said date, no Award has been passed till date.

¶59

)

¶60

<br>

¶61

Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners having appeared before the authority on lO.Ol.2O24 have also Iiled objection s on 29.O4.2024 and the said objections remain to be considercd by the authority by passing an Award and.since no Award is passed, the respondent authorities may be directed to consider the aforesaid objections filed.

¶62

Per contra, learned Government pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 would submit that the validity of the declaration was extended by a further period of twelve months, urde proceedings dated 24.08.2024 and thus, the authorities are now required to pass Award on or before 24.Oa.2O25.

¶63

Learned Government pleader further submits that since the authorities have already issued Award enquiry notice under Section 21 of the Act, the authorities would consider the objections filed by the petitioners as werl as the unofficial respondents in respect of the subject land being acquired by the authorities at the time of passing of the Award.

¶64

7 . Having regard to the submissions made as above and taking note of the fact that since no Award has been passed till date though a declaration was issued on 25.0g.2O23 and the

I I

va.lidity of the said declaration having been extended for a further period of twelve monrhs with effect from 25.Og.2O24 to 24.08.2025, thi,s Court is of the view that the respondent authorities are to be directed to consider the objections liled by the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents while passing the Award in relation to the subject acquisition and also communicate the Award to the petitioners. 8. Subject to the above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶69

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

SD/.K. AMMAJI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

S ION OFFICER

To,

TJ BS

'1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶77

The District Collector, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶78

The Revenue Divisional Officer cum Land Acquisition Officer,^Asifabad, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶79

The Tahasildhar, Rebenna Mandal, Komaram Bheem Asifabad^District.

¶80

The General Manager, Singareni company collieries Limited,^Bellampally, Mancherial District

¶81

One CC to Sri Gudi Madhusudhan Reddy, Advocate IOPUCI

¶82

Two CCs to GP for Land Acquisition, High Court for the State^{of Telangana,} at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶83

One CC to Sri P. Lakshma Reddy, Advocate[OPUC]

¶84

One CC to Sri Harsha Reddy, SC for Singareni Collieries^{LimitedlOPUCl} 10.Two CD Copies

\ \

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710112025

ORDER

o ,:'.. ta, .1".-
uo ,
2OFEB z1n
.,''
tsr

¶92

WP.No.20148 of 2024

¶93

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶94

WITHOUT COSTS

¶95

@ttS

Kammari Kamala v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kammari Kamala v. The State of Telangana

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

Akbar Khan, Vs The State of A.P.

Kirthi Balaraju, Vs The District Collector, Karimnagar District.

Idara-E-Adabiyat-E-Urdu, Hyderabad. Vs the State of Tg.,Mun.Admn.,Hyd.,and 2 Otrs.

Srm Educational Society Vs The State of Telangana

Parlapelli Leya Vs State of Telangana

Kota Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana