Sambari Shankar v. The State of Telangana, represented by

Petition under Siection 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 responden: authorities to pay suitable compensation for the land acquired i.e., an extent of 1400.00 Sq. Yds in Sy. No. 796, situated at [Vletpally, for laying the road, as; per the letter dated 16-10-2024 addressed by the Roads and Buildings Department and the representations of the petitioner dated 17-12- 2024 and 20-12-2024. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPLADMN URBAN DEV counser f or the Res ponde nt N o. 2, SE,I#Xltjlllj|Jt^11?J Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS Counsel forthe Respondent No.4&5 : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER 4 HON,BLE SRI JUSTICEJ. SREE S RAO WRIT PETITION No .3469 of 202s ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner ls that respondent authorities without initiating the land acquisition proceedings and without paying compensation acquired the land i.e., 1,400 square yards in Sy.No.796 situated at Metpally, and laid the C.C. road and the action of the respondent authorities is gross violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of Article 300 A of the Constitution of India. Standing counsel for the

2. Heard Sri K.Venumadhav, learned petitioner, learned Government pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, appearing on beha_lf of respondent No.l, Sri p.Krishna Reddy, learned Counsel appearlng on behalf of respondent No.2, Government pleader lor Roads and Buildings Department appearing on behalf ol respondent No.3 and the learned Assistant Government pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.4 and 5. With the consent of respective parties, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of learned / -\ 2 ..4- admission

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the land adrneasuring Ac. 1 -00 in Sly. No.796 situated at Metpally proper. The respondent authorities laid the road in the subject larrd r.r,ithout initiating the land acquisition proceedings and u,ithout paying compensation to the petitioner. The petitioner earlier approached this Court and filed Writ Petition No.12282 of 2O2O and the same was disposed of basing on the submissions made by the then 1e:arned Standing Counsel appearing on behaif of the Municipa.ity observing that whenever the land of the petitioner is required for laying the road, respondent a.uthorities wiil follorn, the due procedure in law. However, the respondent authorities \vithout follovving the due procedure AS contemplated under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 20 13) had taken the possession of the subject land and laid the road.

4. He further submitted that the petitioner has submitted representation to respondent Nos.2 to 5 on 26.O3.2024 3 Pursuant to the said representation, respondent No.3 issued letter on 16.1O.2O14, wherein respondent No.3 stated that the road was made by the respondent No.2 Municipality and the work was executed by the Roads and Buildings Department arrd the cost of the C.C road is Rs.14,44,23g/_. Thereafter the petitioner submitted representations dated 17 .12.2024 and 20.12.2024. In spite of the same, the respondent authorities have not taken any steps to consider the representations made by the petitioner and not initiated the land acquisition proceedings nor paid the compensation to him. .) Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel basing on the that respondent No.2 and the said road was written instructions submitted Municipality has not laid the road undertaken by the Roads and Buildings Department 6 The learned Government pleader lor Roads and Buildings disputed the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel and stated that the said road was laid by the Municipality. However, they submitted that respondent No.4 may be directed to consider the representation submitted by I \ 4 the petitioner by hxing time limit and the same was not disputed by thr: learned counsel for the petitioner

7. Takrng into consideration o[ the averments ma,Ce in the affidavit as we:ll as the submissions made by the respective parties, respondent No.4 is directed to consider the representations; submitted by the petitioner dated 17. 12.2024 and 20. 12.2024 and pass appropriate orders in ac,cordance with 1aw, rvith Ln a period of eight (B) weeks from the date of receipt of a cop_v of this order, after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioner as well as respondent Nos.2 and 3 by duly taking into consideration of the letter dated 16. lO.2024 issued by the Public Information Officer (R&B) Division, Jagtial

8. Accordinp;ly, the nrit petition is disposed of. No order as to To, Pending riscellaneous applications, if any, sh,all stand //TRUE COPY// SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY ISTRAR ASS FFICER 1 The PrinciOal Secretarv to ths lvlLrni6ip6l Administration, State of Telangana, Secretariais BuilCings,-Hyderabad. 2 2 4

5. N/etpallv Municipatitv, Metpattv proper and Mandar, li& 3lglllt:|oner' TherExecutive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Division, Jagtial, Jagtial The District Collector, Jagtial District, Jagtiat. The Revenue Division a Di6kiet; I Officer, Metpally Division, Metp ally Proo er anal '7

6. One CC to SRI K.VEN ' rw3;j,m;6;:H ^ffiiH:n:T,' ^'" UEV' High court for the state of 8. one cc to SRr p.KRrsHNa .=^^.,"_ :lyr":,","#",fr ;;ff :**=.?ff :":::H]::#:1,,:ffi j;.j:o ,: iys,?ffi:,",ir53,:#3iBl,fi 11.Two CD Copies. surLorrvcs, Hish courr ror the state or BSK BS / HIGH COURT DATED:0710212025 / CC TODAY \ \ ORDER WP.No.3469 of 2025 r- T f-' , --\ -",,rJl o/ 17 c ,'' .?c .9 s...$ ..c J HSlH,t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,U 4A ,/l /t9