The court mandated compensation be paid to the rightful landowner by the municipal corporation, reinforcing the obligation to fulfill statutory duties when challenged inaction and illegal constructions.

ORDER:

SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J.

The present writ petition has been filed to issue appropriate writ, order, or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in acting upon the petitioner’s representations and releasing the compensation amount to the petitioner and also restraining the 4th respondent from making any further constructions on the property, as illegal, contrary to law and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and in violation of Sections 636 and 452 and Chapter-XII of GHMC Act and consequently direct the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to remove the illegal constructions made upon the petitioner’s property and pass orders as it deem it proper and necessary.

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the 1st writ petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land to an extent of 1500 square yards in Sy.No.493 situated at Mettuguda Main Road, Secunderabad and out of the said land, an extent of 1014 square yards was sold to one V.Y.Bhaskar Rao under the registered sale deed and to an extent of 486 square yards is held by the writ petitioner. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) has undertook road widening from Sangeeth Junction to Mettuguda, Secunderabad and land to an extent of 230 square yards alleged to have been acquired by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for road widening and have not paid the compensation till date.

3. It is also averred that the respondent No.4 being Ex-Corporator has encroached a part of the said land and raised constructions and consequent upon the death of respondent No.4, his Legal Representatives - Respondent Nos.5 to 8 were brought on record. Further, it is contended that the writ petitioner has instituted the suits against the respondent No.4 before the competent Court of law and the same were pending adjudication before the Hon’ble High Court and the instant writ petition is filed for consideration of her representation seeking payment of compensation for the land to an extent of 230 square yards, which alleged to have been acquired by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein for road widening.

4. Further, respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein filed a detailed counter- affidavit contending that the house of the writ petitioner bearing No.12-8-423/10 was not included in the list of properties, which was acquired for road widening from Sangeeth to Mettuguda junction, Secunderabad and the house bearing Nos.12-8-422/4/1 and 12-8-423/10 was owned by Mr. Advaiah and the H.No.12-8-424/1 was owned by Mr. Y.V.Bhaskar Rao, which were included along with other affected properties and thereafter, a letter was addressed by the Assistant City Planner, GHMC (Old Circiel-7) to the Special Deputy Collector to initiate land acquisition proceedings and in the list of properties, the H.No.12-8-422/4/1 is not included and accordingly, draft notice under Section 4(1) notification was issued by the then District Collector on 21.11.2007 for including list of 22 effected properties for the road widening and the list of properties i.e., house bearing No.12-8-423/10 was shown to be owned and possessed by Advaiah to an extent of 96.52 square meters or 115.47 square yards and house bearing No.12-8-424/1 was shown to be owned and possessed by Y.V.Bhaskar to an extent of 771.37 square meters or 922.79 square yards. It was stated that the enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act was conducted and consequent upon which the amount of Rs.28,01,760/- vide cheque No.L-031331 dated 13.02.2008 was