Dismissed¶26

V. Kanta Rao v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC13 Mar 2025WP/7704/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; WP.No.7704 of 2025; N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.; decided 13-03-2025; National Highway 65 widening; land acquisition without due process; Survey No. 439, Muthangi Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District; Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; Article 226 mandamus; Section 151 CPC stay; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh writ petition; miscellaneous petitions closed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition / avail appropriate remedy as available under law; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed; no costs. ¶26

V. Kanta Rao Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition / avail appropriate remedy as available under law; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed; no costs.

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondents in proceeding with the widening of National Highway 65 without acquiring the petitioners' lands in Survey No. 439, without initiating proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and without paying compensation, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional (raised in the petition but not adjudicated, as the petition was withdrawn).

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Permission is accorded to withdraw the writ petition, with liberty to avail appropriate remedy as available under law (liberty to file a fresh writ petition).

¶26

Key takeaways

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.ratio¶28
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. No costs.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 7704 of 2025, High Court for the State of Telangana (Special Original Jurisdiction), decided 13-03-2025 by N.V. Shravan Kumar, J. The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution declaring illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional the respondents' action in proceeding with the widening of National Highway 65 without acquiring the petitioners' lands in Survey No. 439 at Muthangi Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District, without initiating proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and without paying compensation, and sought a restraint on dispossession; a stay petition under Section 151 CPC was also filed. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. The Court accorded permission, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to avail appropriate remedy as available under law, directed that pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed, and made no order as to costs. No issue on merits was adjudicated.

¶1

A[ 3255 I

¶2

HrcH couRr^t?+ ITEDS[iIioF TELANGANA : lSpeciai-oiiginalJurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY ,. ." ,THE^{THIRTEENTH DAY OF-MABCH} WO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FIVE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE N'V'SHRAVANKUMAR}

¶6

WRIT^PETITION O: 77 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 I subba^Rao'.ase.d 3-b9.Yl-18 #Sillff:Ull:ll H#i"lE"^Tyl:f;'Y;#,"'"a";'t8"i6$""';16#Il'BEr'i'0""0;o

¶9

2 [lli'[*:]i,",'li9&;h,.H,,iiitj#],'fl^{tgxTs+*i"ifl,]Hq} Pipeline^{Road,Madinaguoi} ...PETIIoNERS

¶10

scioo+g

¶11

AND

¶12

1 2 i51..;ai:Hi,i1?J111it'ftt'ti#ldffidt"-';'#'*

¶13

3 :?!3'?;3;uo1: -.,',:pt!#".lll[i''HtiB3+?''irB:"'f:Sffi

¶14

4 5 ifl :{:VSlffi^{[("T,"g+::if XH:He"ffi f,1Sil3;'8fi l"",,Sansareddy}

¶15

b. jEig"i:,Y:",'"i'33iisruTg"?Elli!,"o"n''Hvderabad 7. ifl i'n[sJ{:i 8. 9. 10 i[:]]rrtl#"+n""::,,q,"ixffi lril/s. Ram^{Kumar Contractot} [,ffi fdi:#F*'{:3:P;#';]:*,, Aaryana-¹³⁴¹⁰⁹ ...RESPoNDENTS

¶16

Petition^{under Article226 of lhe Constitution of lndiapraiing that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith' the High Court may be} pleased to^{issuean appropriate writ' order'or direction'particularlya Writof} Mandamus,^{declaring the actionof the Respondentsin proceeding with the} widening^{of National Highway 65 without acquiring the Petitioners'lands in}

¶17

Survey No. .439 , without following the due process of raw, without initiating proceeding:; Lrnc e r the Right to Fair Compensation and l-ranl,;parency in Land '/ Acquisition, Fleh abilitation and Resetflement Act, 2013, an(: without paying compensatir:n tc the Petitioners, as illegal, atbitary, unconstitutional and violative of the )rinciples of Natural . Justice and consequenfly direct the Respondents rc,t lo dispossess the petitioners from their pror)erty, specifically Ac. 0-04 1112 ,i]tu rtas of land in Survey No. 439 belonging to r)etitioner No. 1, situated at lMur fangi Village, patancheru Mandal, S;angirreddy District, Telangana State, zrnd Ac. O-O4 1/2 Guntas of land in Survey N<:. 43g belonging to Petitioner lilor; 1 and 2, situated at Muthangi Village, pat: ncheru Mandal, Sangareddy Di:;tri 11, Telangana State, without following rJue :rocirss of law NO:10F 202!l

¶18

Petition ''rnder Section 151 cPC praying that in the c rcurnstances stated in the affidavit f iler<l in support of the petition, the High courl ma / be pleased to stay all further c,) tstructt on, renovation, or expansion activities related to the widening of Natio r'er Highway 65 without acquiring the petitk)ners' rands in Survey No: 4:ig. l:urther, the petitioners seek a direction restraining the Respondents frr_,n, dispossessing them from their property, specilically Ac. O_04 1/2 Guntas of lanc rr Survey No. 439 belonging to petitioner lrlo. .i , and Ac. 0_04 1/2 Guntas of le n(l irt Survey No. 43g joinfly owned by petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, both situated ar V Lrthangi vilage' patancheru [Vrandar, szrngar.eddy District, Telangana State.

¶19

Counsel for the petitioner: SRl. B. RAMDAS

¶20

Counsel for the I{es oondent Nos. 1,4,5,6: Gp FOR LAND ACeUISITION Counsel for the Resprondent Nos. 2&3: SRI M. RAMU, SC FOFI NH/{l Counsel for the t?espondent Nos. 7,8,&9: Gp FOR ROADS AND Bl.,lLDlNGS Counsel for the fdespondent No.10: _

¶21

The Court made the tbllowing: ORDER

¶22

HONOURABLE^SRI JUSTICE^{N.V.SHRAVANKUMAR}

¶23

WTTIT PETIT^{ION No.NMof2025}

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Toclay when^{the matterhasbeen takenuP for hearing' leamed} counsel^{for the petitiotlersseekspermissionof this Courtto withdraw} the writ petition^{rvith a libertyto file freshwrit petition'}

¶26