The court emphasized that land acquisition must follow due process, including proper notice to affected parties, and failure to do so invalidates the acquisition.

ORDER :

Surepalli Nanda, J.

Heard learned senior designate counsel Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, representing learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and learned standing counsel Mr. L. Prabhakar Reddy appearing on behalf of TSIIC Respondent No.4 and learned counsel Mr. P. Ravicharan, Link Legal Advocate appearing on behalf of Respondent No.8, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 7.

2. The petitioner approached the court in W.P.No. No.1245 of 2012 seeking prayer as under:

“to issue a writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside the registration of lease and conveyance deeds bearing document no. 20560/2005 and 20562/2005 both dated 28-12-2005 on the file of the seventh respondent, by declaring the action of the respondents no. 4, 5 and 6 of the diversification of the acquired land in survey no. 48 of Nanakramguda village, Serilingampalli mandal, Ranga Reddy district, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction; and be pleased to pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The petitioners approached the court in W.P.No. No.1294 of 2012 seeking prayer as under:

“to issue a writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus setting aside the registration of lease and conveyance deeds bearing document no. 20560/2006 and 20562/2006 both dated 28-12-2005 on the file of the seventh respondent, by declaring the action of the respondents no. 4, 5 and 6 of the diversification of the acquired land in survey no. 49 of Nanakramguda village, Serilingampalli mandal, Ranga Reddy district, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction; and be pleased to pass such other order/s as this hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

4. The petitioners approached the court in W.P.No. No.6577 of 2012 seeking prayer as under:

“a) declaring that the diversification of the severed land in survey no.49 of Nanakramguda village, Serilingampalli mandal, Ranga Reddy district falling to the east of the outer ring road in favour of the sixth respondent as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction, by holding that the said land stands reverted to the petitioner.

b) setting aside the award dated 30-11-2005 in file no. B/245/2000 on the file of the third respondent, by deleting the severed land in Survey No.49 of Nanakramguda village, Serilingampalli mandal, Ranga Reddy district to the eastern side of the outer ring road, and to re-conduct award enquiry, and to pass award afresh, and affording an opportunity to the petitioners of being heard.”

5. The petitioner approached the court in W.P.No. No.6501 of 2012 seeking prayer as under:

“(a) declaring that the diversification of the severed land in survey no.48 of Nanakramguda village, Serilingampalli mandal, Ranga Reddy district falling to the east of the outer ring road in favour of the sixth respondent as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction, by holding that the said land stands reverted to the petitioner.

(b) setting aside the award dated 30-11-2005 in file no. B/245/2000 on the file of the third respondent, by deleting the area of 1 acre 3 guntas which is already part of the award bearing no.04/2006 in file no.LA/Unit.V/ORR/08/2006 dated 27-5-2006, and the severed land falling to the eastern side of the outer ring road, and to re-conduct award enquiry, and to pass award afresh after deducting the said extent, and affording an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard.”

PERUSED THE RECORD :

6. The case of the Petitioner A.L. Sadanandam in W.P.No.1245/2012 and W.P.No.6501/2012 in brief as per the averments made in the affidavits filed by the Petitioner in support of the said two (02) writ petitions is as under :

i. The Writ Petitioner i.e., A.L.Sadanandam in W.P.No.1245/2012 who is also writ petitioner in W.P.No.6501/2012 is the o