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

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 19118

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
SUMATHI JAGADAM
Kancham Guru Murthy – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Governmen – Respondent
WP 2007/2016



APHC010139462016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3459]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 2007/2016 Between:

1. K ANCHAM GURU MURTHY, S/O LATE GURAPPA, AGED 54 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE, R/O D.NO. 26/93-1, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, MYDUKUR MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. U NION OF INDIA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMEN, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110001.

2. J OINT COLLECTOR CUM LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KADAPA AT KADAPA DISTRICT.

3. T HE GENERAL MANAGER TECH AND PROJECT DIRECTOR, NHAI, PIU, HNO: 25/684/150, 1ST FLOOR, PADMAVATHI NAGAR, NEAR INDORE STADIUM, NANDYAL, KURNOOL-518501.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not passing an award under section 3G (1) and also not referring petitioner's claim for determination of compensation under Section 3 G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, in spite of his protest while receiving the cheque No:

694406 dated 03.10.2011; legal notice dated 24.03.2012, correction notice dated 12.11.2015 and representation dated 04.01.2016 as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and offends articles 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pass an award and communicate the same to the petitioner and also refer the matter to the Arbitrator as contemplated under the provisions of National Highways Act. 1956 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pay compensation in respect of land acquired in Sy.No: 767 to an extent of Ac.0.45 cents of S-Mydukur RevenueVillage, Mydukur Mandal, Kadapa District IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 2542 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to pay compensation in respect of land acquired in Sy.No: 767 to an extent of Ac.0.45 cents of S-Mydukur RevenueVillage, Mydukur Mandal, Kadapa District IA NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP 2543 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to pass an award and communicate the same to the petitioner and also refer the matter to the Arbitrator as contemplated under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 IA NO: 6 OF 2016(WPMP 32237 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M SOLOMON RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP)

2. ANJALI AGARWAL

3. S S VARMA (SC FOR NHAI)

The Court made the following ORDER:

Though the matter was listed on 17.11.2025, there was no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 08.12.2025. Even on that day there was no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the matter was listed today under the caption “for dismissal”.

Today when the matter is called there is no representation for the petitioner.

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that compensation has already deposited to the petitioner. Since the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 15.12

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