Back
2019 Supreme(AP) 210
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, JJ.
Kesiraju Seetharamaiah and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India and Ors. – Respondents
WP Nos. 13720 and 21718 of 2017
Decided On : 06-09-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : B. Rachna Reddy
For the Respondents: B. Krishna Mohan, Assistant Solicitor General, A. Laxminarayana and Government Pleaders
Headnote:
Right to Information Act, 2005 - The petitioners are the owners of different extents of lands in different survey numbers in Devarapalli Village and Mandal, West Godavari District filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus - the action of the 6th respondent herein, in issuing File No. RDOKUR-RT10APPL (WSLA)/39/2016-AO-RDO-KOVVURU Roc. No. 2504/2016 (NH) (endorsement) and consequential Roc. No. 2504/16/NH-16SH107 (EGK) (endorsement), pursuant to applications made under the Right to Information Act, 2005, in relation to the building (widening/six lining etc.,) maintenance, management and operation of realigned portion of National Highway 16 SH107 (EGK) on the stretch of land from Kms. 15.700 to Kms. 81.400 from Gundugolanu-Kowuru Section, West Godavari District, A.P., whereby the 6th respondent claims that the multiple factor for calculation of compensation is applicable at 1.25 in rural areas per GO. Ms. No. 389, instead of 2.00, completely contrary to the Letter NHAI/RO-VJA/RFCLARR/LA/2016-17/1472 dated 26.10.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequential Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016, issued by the 3rd respondent, in pursuance of the determination of market value as per the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act 2013), as illegal arbitrary, in violation of the National Highways Act, 1956, the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice – Held, The Rule 28(1) of Andhra Pradesh Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules 2014, Annexure to G.O. Ms. No. 389, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department is hereby declared as arbitrary, directing the respondents to issue modified variable multiplication factor as prescribed in the 2nd component of the table given in First Schedule of Act 30 of 2013 depending upon the distance with prospective effect, while rejecting the request of the petitioners to apply multiplication factor 2.00 as per Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016 as the same was withdrawn by issuing another Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016. It is needless to mention that multiplication factor as amended in view of the directions will have prospective effect and the Awards already passed shall not be reopened on account of this order. WP No. 21718 of 2017 is dismissed. No costs – Petition allowed
JUDGMENT :
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
1. The petitioners are the owners of different extents of lands in different survey numbers in Devarapalli Village and Mandal, West Godavari District filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus. WP No. 13720 of 2017 is filed for the following relief:
"declaring the action of the 6th respondent herein, in issuing File No. RDOKUR-RT10APPL (WSLA)/39/2016-AO-RDO-KOVVURU Roc. No. 2504/2016 (NH) (endorsement) dated 2.11.2016 and consequential Roc. No. 2504/16/NH-16SH107 (EGK) (endorsement) dated 2.2016, pursuant to applications made under the Right to Information Act, 2005, in relation to the building (widening/six lining etc.,) maintenance, management and operation of realigned portion of National Highway 16 SH107 (EGK) on the stretch of land from Kms. 15.700 to Kms. 81.400 from Gundugolanu-Kowuru Section, West Godavari District, A.P., whereby the 6th respondent claims that the multiple factor for calculation of compensation is applicable at 1.25 in rural areas per GO. Ms. No. 389 dated 20.11.2014, instead of 2.00, completely contrary to the Letter NHAI/RO-VJA/RFCLARR/LA/2016-17/1472 dated 26.10.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequential Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016 dated 23.11.2016, issued by the 3rd respondent, in pursuance of the determination of market value as per the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act 2013), as illegal arbitrary, in violation of the National Highways Act, 1956, the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice and
(ii) and consequently to direct the 5th and 6th respondents to compensate the petitioners land for acquisition of building (widening/six lining etc.,) maintenance, management and operation of realigned portion of National Highway 16 SH107 (EGK) on the stretch of land from Kms. 15.700 to Kms. 81.400 from Gundugolanu-Kowuru Section/Division West Godavari District in accordance with multiple factor 2.00 pursuant to Letter NHAI/RO-VJA/RFCLARR/LA/2016-17/1472, dated 26.10.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequential Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016 dated 23.11.2016, issued by the 3rd respondent.
(iii) To direct the respondents to delete and cancel Rule 28(1) of Annexure to G.O. Ms. No. 389, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department dated 20.11.2014."
2. Writ Petition No. 21718 of 2017 is filed for the following relief.
"(i) to declare the action of the respondent No. 6 in issuing arbitrary Endorsements pursuant to applications made under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in relation to the building (widening/six laning etc.,) maintenance, management and operation of realigned portion of National Highway 16 SH107 (EGK) on the stretch of land from Kms. 15.700 to Kms. 81.400 from Gundugolanu-Kowuru Section, West Godavari, vide Roc. No. 2504/2016 (NH) dated 2.11.2016 and consequential Roc. No. 2504/16/NH-16 SH 107 (EGK) dated 12.2016 whereby the 6th respondent claims that the multiple factor for calculation of compensation is applicable at 1.25 in rural areas per G.O. Ms. No. 389 dated 20.11.2014 instead of 2.00, completely contrary to the Letter NHAI/RO-VJA/RFCLARR/LA/2016-17/1472 dated 26.10.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequential Memo No. 16022/6/2016/R.II.I/2016 dated 23.11.2016, issued by the 3rd respondent, in pursuance of the determination of market value as per the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act, 2013) as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of the National Highways Act, 1958, the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice and
(ii) consequently to direct the 5th and 6
