IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
KALVAKOTA PRASADA RAO KARIMNAGAR AND 2 OTRS. – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TS. L.A. HYDERABAD AND 3 OTRS. – Respondent
WP 30511/2017
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.30511 of 2017
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of respondent No.3 is issuing memo bearing No.B/81/2017, dated 04.09.2017 directing the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum in respect of petitioners’ land to an extent of Ac.2-02 guntas in Survey No.94 of Chippakurthi Village, Ramadugu Mandal, Karimnagar District instead of referring to concerned authority under Section 64 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (for short “the Act”), 2013. A consequential prayer is made to direct respondent No.3 to refer the matter to the authority concerned in respect of compensation of petitioners’ land.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioners claim to be the owners to an extent of Ac.15-12 guntas, Ac.15-12 guntas and Ac.10-12 guntas of land respectively situated in Survey No.94 and also other lands in different survey number in Chippakurthi Village, Ramadugu Mandal, Karimnagar District. The respondent No.1 issued Gazette Notification on 18.02.2017 for acquisition of Ac.126-39¾ of patta land including (Ac.39-02 guntas) in Survey No.94 situated in the limits of Chippakurthi Village, Ramadugu Mandal, Karimnagar District for excavation of gravity canals under Dr.BRAPCSS Project (Package-8). The petitioners submit that their lands to an extent of Ac.2-02 guntas in Survey No.94 was acquired along with their other lands in different survey numbers for the said project showing respondent No.4 as pattadar and enjoyer of the land to an extent of Ac.2-02 guntas in Survey No.94, which was coming under acquisition.
3. A preliminary notification, dated 18.02.2017, was issued under Section 11(1) of the Act, 2013 approved by respondent No.2 and was published in the Gazette notification and in newspapers. Subsequently, since no objections were received within 60 days in respect of Ac.2-02 guntas of land published against respondent No.4, a declaration under Section 19(1) of the Act, 2013 was approved by respondent No.2 vide its proceedings No.G1/3007/2017, dated 26.05.2017 and was published in the Telangana Gazette on 31.05.2017 and in newspapers on 04.06.2017. Thereafter, a notice under Section 21(1) of the Act, 2013 was issued on 31.05.2017 and was published in village and also individual notices under Section 21(4) of the Act, 2013 were issued on the same day fixing the date of award enquiry on
19.06.2017 and the said notices were served on all the interested persons and award enquiry was conducted on 19.06.2017. In the said enquiry, the respondent No.4 was present and deposed that he is pattadar and enjoyer of Ac.2-02 guntas of land in Survey No.94 of Chippakurthi Village, Ramadugu Mandal and requested to pay compensation to him and also filed pattadar passbook and Form-1B in support of his claim. Thereafter, the petitioners have filed objections before respondent No.3 stating that they are the pattadars of the land in Survey No.94 and the said land belongs to them and that their names were entered in the revenue records and pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued in their favor and requested not to pay compensation to respondent No.4.
4. The petitioners further submit that they are in possession and enjoyment of the subject property and they have not sold the land at any point of time to respondent No.4. It is further submitted the respondent No.4 in collusion with revenue authorities have manipulated the revenue records in his name to claim compensation illegally in respect of their lands, even though the respondent No.4 is not the pattadar and enjoyer of the said land. The petitioners would further submit that if any objections are received in respect of payment of compensation, the objections have to be referred to the concerned authority and in the present case, the respondent No.3 without referring the matter to the concerned authority, directed them to approa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.