SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Telangana) 623

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
A. Rajasheker Reddy, J.
B. Chandramani - Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana And Others - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 13786 of 2020
Decided On : 01-09-2020

Advocates:
V. Venumadhav, Advocate

Headnote:

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 64(2) - Claim of Compensation - Land Acquisition - Seeking to declare action - Compensation amount - Land Acquisition submits that since there are disputes between the petitioner and unofficial respondents for payment of compensation, the Land Acquisition Officer is taking steps to refer the matter to the Authority under Section 64(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Held, Land Acquisition Officer came to conclusion to refer the matter under Section 64(2) of the Act, he cannot disburse the compensation till the dispute between the parties is decided - Writ Petition is disposed of, enabling the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter under the said Act - However, it is open to the parties to raise all the contentions regarding their right and entitlement of the subject property, before the concerned authority - Writ Petition is disposed of

JUDGMENT

A Rajasheker Reddy, J. - This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in disbursing compensation amount, in respect of H.No.2-2-165, Uppal Main Road, Uppal, Hyderabad, to the 5th respondent, without considering the representation of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition submits that since there are disputes between the petitioner and unofficial respondents for payment of compensation, the Land Acquisition Officer is taking steps to refer the matter to the Authority under Section 64(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 'the Act').

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till the matter is decided, there may be a direction to the concerned respondents not to disburse the compensation.

5. Since the Land Acquisition Officer came to conclusion to refer the matter under Section 64(2) of the Act, he cannot disburse the compensation till the dispute between the parties is decided.

6. Recording the aforesaid submission of learned Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, enabling the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter under the said Act. However, it is open to the parties to raise all the contentions regarding their right and entitlement of the subject property, before the concerned authority.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top