Thuniki Naresh Kumar v. The State of Telangana

2. The District Collector (Land Acquisition), Rajanna Sircilla District' 3. The Special Collector (Land Acquisition), Sri Ram Sagar Project, SSP & JCRGLIP, Tamaka, HYderabad

4.TheLandAcquisitionofficer.Cum-SpecialDeputy^Collector,LAUnit.Vlll, fFCnafr,tn anti or. g.n. Ambedkar, PCSSP, Rajanna Sircilla District' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in not.referring the application of the Petitioner Dt.2BlO2l2O16 made U/s. 64 of Act 30/2013, to the Authority in respect of the H.No. 2-2011 (Abadi) situated at Rudravaram Village of Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna siricilla District as illegal and arbitrary action and also violative of Art., 14, 16, 21 0t the 300-A of the constitution of lndia and provisions of Right to Fair Conipensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition' Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the 4th RespondenthereintoreferthemattertotheAuthorityU/Sec.64oftheLand Acquisition Act, 30i201 3 forthwith' lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 issue a direction, directing the 4th Respondent herein to refer the Application of the Petitioner Dt.28.02.2016, U/sec., 64 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 30 of 2013 in respect Authority belonging to the Petitioner H.No.2-2011 (Abadi) situated at Rudravaram Village of Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ petition in the interbst of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH.SHIVA KUMAR RAJU Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. K.RADHA REDDY, AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: ORDER THE IIONOTJRABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.6365 OF 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: " ... to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of l{rit of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in not referring the application of the Petitioner Dt. 28/02/2016 made U/s. 64 of Act 30/2013, to the Authority in respecl of the H.No. 2-20/l (Abadi) situated at Rudravaram Village of Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilta District as illegal and arbitrary action and also violative of Art., 14, 16, 2l of the 300-A of the Constitution of India and provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparenqt in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Acl, 30 of20l3 and consequently direct the 4th Respondent herein to refer the matter to the Authority U/Sec. 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 30/2013 forthwith."

2. Heard Mr.Ch.Shiva Kumar Raju, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Ms.K.Radha Reddy, leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. With the consent of the respective parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

4. Facts giving rise to hling of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner is claiming that he is the owner of house bearing No.2- 2011 (Abadi) in an extent of 45 square yards situated at Rudravaram r, l i I I i I I i 2 Village, Venrulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. The respondent authorities ar:quired the subject property for the purpose of construction of Mid Manair. In the said project, the entire village of Rudravaram subrnerged. [{esponclent No.4 passed award dated --.02.2016 invoking the provisions of Right to Fair Cornpensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, I{ehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 201 3 (for short, "the Act") and awarded nteager cornpensation. Not satisfying with the same, the petitioner submitted an application on 28.02.2016 before respondent No.4 requesting hirn ro refer the matter to the competent authority for detennination o1'proper compensation. In spite of the same, respondent No.4 has not taken any steps to consider the claim of the petitioner and the sarne is in gross violation ol the provisions of the Act.

5. Learncd counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has subnritted application on 28.02.2016 requesting respondent No.4 to ref'er the lnatter to the cornpetent authority under Section 64 ol' the Act, respondent No.4 has not taken any steps. He fur1her submits that sirnilarly situated claimants belonging to the very satre village have approached this Couft and filed W.P.No. 1378 of 2018 3 and the same was disposed of directing the land acquisition officer to consider the application in terms of Section 64 of the Act by fixing time limit. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the very same relief.

6. Learned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Land Acquisition submits that if the application submitted by the petitioner dated

28.02.2016 is still pending, respondent No.4 will consider the sarne in accordance with law and requested this Court to grant reasonable tirne. 7 . Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner is claiming that he is the owner of house bearing No.2- 2011 (Abadi) in an extent of 45 square yards situated at Rudravaram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District and the said property was acquired for the purpose of construction of Mid Manair and the land acquisition olficer had passed award on -.02.2016 vide Lr.No.B I 22 I I 2007-MI-Patta-MP. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application before respondent No.4 on 28.02.2016 requesting. him to refer the matter to the competent authority under Section 64 of the Act seeking enhancement of compensation. I I I 4

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.4 to consider the application subrnitted by thc petitioner dated 28.02.2016 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from thc date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving opportunity to the petitioner, if not already disposed oL

9. With the abovc said directions, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shalt stand closed. No order as to costs. I I To, Telangana. //TRUE COPY// SD/. K. SREE RAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGI9TRAR sEcnoN {rr,..* 1. The Principal Secre_tary, Revenue Departme-nt, Land Acquisition Dept., Dr B. R. Ambedka r Secretariat auitahdll b"irj'or jl' ilvj"iJori,," st#"=r "t 2 The District coilector (Land Acquisition), Rajanna Sirciila District. 3. The Speciat Co,ector (Land Acquisitiiinl,'Sii n#-Sig;i'p"t*t, SSp Et . JCRGLIp, Tarnaka, Hyderabad 4 The Land Acouisition bfficer - cum - Speciar Deputy^ coilector, LA Unit_Vil, _ FFC/MMR and Dr. B.R A.mU-"oL*, pC55Fl'H!i"nnu Sirciila District. ,". 5. one cc to sRt cH sIlvA.r1u_MAH RAJu;il;tate toiijq-."' 6. Two CCs to Gp FoR L4Nq Ado"uib'iiio'i.rl'Hign Court for rhe Srate of _ fetangana at Hyderabad touil - --'-' ' '"''' 7. Two CD Cooies BSR/BN \ I i i I I I HIGH COURT DATED: 0410312025 CC TODAY ( q o STAI€ { 9,E 0'l trUt ?St -1, t (1 * DFqr:'r'(l ORDER WP.No.6365 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS