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)(Tel) 62893

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Panta Surendra Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 30001/2018



THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition Nos.30001 of 2018; 24648 of 2020 and

4878 of 2025

COMMON ORDER:

Writ Petition No.30001 of 2018 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the 4th respondent in issuing preliminary notification vide No.I/03/2018-2 dated 27.02.2018 (hereinafter referred to as Impugned Notification) in FORM-C as per Rule 6 of Acquisition Rules, 2017 and Section 11 of Acquisition Act, 2013 notifying that the petitioners lands admeasuring Ac.10-00 Cents in Chandanvelly Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District are proposed to be acquired for public purpose of 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, deprivation of Constitutional Right to Life as enunciated under Article 19(1)(e) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and violative of Article 300A of The Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as Acquisition Act 2013) and contrary to the provisions of The Telangana State Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules 2014 (hereinafter referred to as Acquisition Rules, 2014) and contrary to the provisions of The Telangana State Land Acquisition Consent Award Voluntary Acquisition and LumpSum Payment towards Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as Acquisition Rules, 2017) consequently set aside the preliminary notification vide No.I/03/2018-2 dated

27.02.2018…”

Writ Petition No.24648 of 2020 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the 5th respondent in illegally trespassing into our lands admeasuring Ac 10- 00 Cents in Chandanvelly Village, Shabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District without following the due procedure as contemplated under Law as illegal, arbitrary, deprivation of Constitutional Right to Life as enunciated Under Article19(1)(e) and Article 21 of The Constitution of India and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act

2013 and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana State Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules 2014 and also contrary to the provisions of the Telangana State Land Acquisition Consent Award Voluntary Acquisition and LumpSum Payment towards Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules, 2017 and consequently direct the respondents not to trespass into our land without following the due procedure as contemplated under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 the Telangana Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules, 2014 and the Telangana State Land Acquisition Consent Award Voluntary Acquisition and LumpSum Payment towards Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules, 2017…”

Writ Petition No.4878 of 2025 is filed seeking the following prayer:

“declaring the action of the Respondent authorities in issuing proceedings vide Lr.No.1/03/2018 dt.12.10.2020 on the file of Respondent No.2 without issuing notice of the Petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice apart from contrary to the provisions of Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition Rehabilitation And Resettlement Act, 2013 and resultantly set aside the same and grant such other reliefs as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case…”

2. Since the issue involved and the petitioners in all these writ petitions are common, these writ petitions were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

3. Facts giving rise to filing of W.P.No.30001 of

2018: Petitioners c

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