l.D.Ravinder v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article .226 of the 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 wRlT oF MANDAtiIUS declaring the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioners by issuing impugned Notice i.-eJor Way Entry / Exit Notice, dated 1710212025 issued by the 9th respondent threatening to remove the Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery in Sy-No.791/E situated at Rudraram Village Shivar, Patancheru lrrlandal, Sangareddy District, as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents to withdraw the impugned Notice i.e., For Way Entry / Exit Notice, dated 17 iO2l2O25 issued by the gth respondent by allowing the petitioners to run tireir business i.e., Laxmi Ganapathl Nursery as usual. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition und,ar Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned Notice i.e., For Way Entry / Exit Nctice, dated 1710212025 issued by the 9th respondent by allowing the petitioners to run their business i.e , Laxmi Ganapathi l',Jursery as usual in Sy.No.791/E situated at Rudraram Village Shivar, PatancherLr iVlandal, Sangareddy District, pending finalizalion of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.KANAKAIAH, Sr. COUNSEL, REP. FOR SRI NARENDAR JALLI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 4 to 6: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondent No.2 & 3: SRI V.T.KALYAN, SC FOR NHAI Counsel for the Respondent No.7 to 9: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: ORDER / THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.6834 of 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: " ... to issue a Writ Order or direction more parliculorly one in the nature of Wrrt of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioners by issuing impugned Notice i.e., For ll'ay Entry / Exit Notice, dated 17/02/2025 issued by the 9th respondent threatening to remove the Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery in Sy.No.79l/E situated at Rudraram Village Shivor, Patancheru ll,landal, Sangareddy District, as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and violation of Article l4 ancl 21 of the Conslitution oJ' India and consequently direct the respondents to withdra\4, the impugned Notice i.e., For Way Entry / Exit Notice, dated 17/02/2025 issued by the 9th respondent by allowing the petilioners b run their business i.e., Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery as usual. "

2. Heard Sri J.Kanakaiah, leamed Senior Counsel representing Sri J.Narendar, leamed counsel for the petitioners, leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.l and 4 to 6, Sri V.T.Kalyan, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings for respondent Nos.7 to 9.

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

4. Facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that 2 the petitior:.ers are the absolute owners and possessors of the lands to an extent olA.c.l.04 gts, Ac.0. l2 gts, Ac.0.28 gts, Ac.0.l2 61ts, Ac.0.28 gts and Ac.l 04 gts, in Sy.Nos.768tEE, 787lAA,79llE,787lF.,79llEF. and 768[ru. sittLated at Rudraram Village, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddy District. The respondent authorities, under the guise of widening National tlighwal, No.65-Hyderabd to Mumb:ri road, are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery ln Sy.No.79ld, sitr-rated at Rudraram Village Shvar, Patancheru Mandal, Sangareddl, District (herein alier referred to as "subject properly") without issuing any notice and without following due procedure as contemplat,:cl under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation anrl Resettlement Act, 2013 tAct 30 of 2013). At that stage, petitioners along with others have approached this Court and fited W.P.No.25292 of 2024 and the sane was disposed of on 12.09.2024, directing the respondents therein to follorv dtre ltrocedure in accordance with law. Thereafter, respondent No.9, without conducting any enquiry straightaway issued impugned notice date,l 17.02.2025, directing the petitioners to remrlve the Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery in the subject property and handover the physical possession,, without giving prior notice. Pursuant to the said notice, petitioners have submitted detailed explanation on 21.02.2025. Respondent No.9 without conducting enquiry and without passing any order, pursuant to the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated

21.02.2025, IS trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject propefty

5. Learned Senior Counsel vehemently contended that pursuant to the impugned notice issued by respondent No.9, petitioner submitted -detailed explanation on 21.0.2.2025 and respondent authorities without conduiting enquiry and without following due procedure contemplated under the provisions of the Act 30 of 2013, are trying to dispossess the petitioners from the subject property and the same is gross violation of principles of natural justice and also violative of 300-A of Constitution of India.

6. Learned Govemment Pleader for Roads and Buildings submitted that the subject property belongs to Roads and Buildings Department and in the earlier writ petition, petitioners without impleading Roads and Buildings, as party respondent hled W.P.No.25292 of 2024. However, respondent No.9 issued impugned notice dated 17.02.2025, directing the + petitioner lo remove Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery existing. in the subject propefty a.nd hand over the physical possession to him. However, petitioners rvithouI handing. over the same, submittcd cxplanation and approached this Court and filed the present writ petition,rnd the same is not mainta,inable under law. However, he fairly submitted that if the explanation submitted by the petitioners, dated 21 .02.2025 is pending, respondent No.9 will consider the same in accordance with law and requested this Court to grant reasonable time

7. Learned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Land ,,\cquisition and Sri V.T.Kalyan, learned Standing Counsel, reiterated the very same submissior.s rnade by the learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings.

8. Having considered the rival submissions madc b; the respective parlies and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioners are claiming right over the subject property and in suppoft of their clam they have filed a copy of pattadar passbooks. The record further discloses that in earlier round of litigation, this Court disposed c,f W.P.No.25292 of 2024, dated 12".09.2024 directing the respondents therein to follow due process of law in accorclance with law. .1,. \ t i I i , I 1 5 It furlher reveals that respondent No.9 issued impugned notice on 17 .02.2025, directing the petitioners to vacate and handover the physical possession in respect of the subject property and pursuant to the said notice, petitioner submitted explanation on 21.02.2025 and the same is pending for consideration I t

9. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of respective parties, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, with a direction to respondent No.9 to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner dated

21..02.2025, pursuant to the impugned notice dated 17.02.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioners, including personal hearing, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order However, it is made clear that till such time,, respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps in respect of Laxmi Ganapathi Nursery existing in the subject propefty.

10. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 6 a Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. There shall be order as to costs To, //TRUE COPY' SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR $ TION OFFICER '1 . The Principzll Secretary, Revenue Department (Lanc Acquisition), Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

2. The Regional Officer, National Highway Authority of lndia, Regional Office, Hyderabad, O/o. Ministry of Roads Transport and High';'uays (tt/oRTH), Erramanzil, Hyderabad - 500082.

3. The Project Direclor, National Highway Authority of lndia, O/o. Backside of Zilla Parishad, Sangareddy, PIN - 502001.

4. The District Collector (Land Acquisition), Sangareddy, District. 5. The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Sangareddy, Sangareddy District.

6. The Tahsildar, Patancheru lvlandal, Sangareddy Dist:ict. 7. The Engineer-in-Chref , Roads and Buildings, NH Circle, Erramanzil Colony, Telangana S;tate.

8. The Superirrtending Engineer, Roads and Buildings, NH Circle, Erramanzil, Hyderabad - 500082.

9. The Execu ve Engineer, Roads and Bulldings, NH Circle, Erramanzrl, Hyderabad - 500082.

10. One CC to SRI NARENDAR JALLI, Advocate [OPUC.] 1 1. One CC to SiRl V.T.KALYAN, SC FOR NHAI [OPUC] '12.Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State.r:f Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

13.Two CCs to GP FOR ROADS Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] & BUILDINGS, High Courl for the State of

14.Two CD Copries BSR zo .D GJP \o_ l i I i l CC TODAY e STAT€ o .1 r-) l c ) .r- \.:/&..t..--- 1t \t\[q N6 o * ]ESF A1 HIGH COURT DATED: 0610312025 ORDER WP.No.6834 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS a @)4' 1O