High Court · 2025
Case Details
Acts & Sections
tsri:ili,iilYs" The Chief General Manaoer,.Singareni Collieries Company Limited, yellandu Area, yellandu proper an'd trrtanoZj, rc,rr"#i#tsi""tiiJl AND
1. 2 J 4 5 6 t, -7 ...RESPONDENTS PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ decraring the action of the respondents no.5 and 6 in acquiring the lands of the petitioners an extent of 15 acres 38 guntas in Sy No 24412' situated at Usirikayalapalli Village of Singareni Mandar, Khammam District, without initiating the rand acquisition proceedings and without paying any compensation or without paying any exgratia or in the alternate without allotting the equal extent of the said land in favour of the petitioners, is nothing but arbitrary' illegal' null and void and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and also contrary to the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition' Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act' 2013 and also against the Apex Court Judgment in lr/ekala Pandus case Consequently' direct the respondents to initiate the rand acquisition proceedings and pay compensation to the petitioners for the tand an extent of 15 acres 38 guntas in Sy'No 24412' situated at Usirlkayalapalli Village of Singareni Mandal' Khammam District' or in the alternate pay exgratia or allot equal extent of land in the same village' t.A. NO: 10F20 5(WPMP NO:7 326 OF 2015 1 ) t petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents to initiate the land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation to the petitioners for the land acquired of them an extent of 15 acres 38 guntas in Sy No 24412' situated at Usirikayalapalli Village of Singareni Mandal, Khammam District' Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K'VENUMADHAV--- ffi;;;i io, in" n.tpondent No'1 to 4: GP FoR REVENUE counsel for the Respona".i'r'io's a o' sRt NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO' The Court made the following: ORDER SC FOR SCCL THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITIONN o.5498 of 2015 ORDER The petitioners were assignees of lands in Surve,v No.244/2 Acs.2.OO to the The Tahsildar, ol Usirikayalapaili Village, Singareni Mandal. Yellandu, assigned Acs.4.OO to petitioner No.l, father of petitioner No.2, Acs. 1 . 1g guntas to the fathers of petrtioner Nos.3 and 4, Acs.3.0O to petitioner No.5, and Acs.3.22 guntas to the father of petitioner No.6 through proceedings dated 3 I . 1 0. 1984. Their names were entered in the pahanies by the Tahsildar, Singareni. Upon petitioners, representation, the Revenue Divisiona_l Officer, Kothagudem, sought a report, and the Tahsildar, Singareni, confirmed on lg.O7.2}l2 tf,t+ tfr. land in Survey No.244/2 was assigned to petitioners and is currently occupied by Singareni Collieries. The petitioners submitted repeated representations, including one on Og.Og.2O74, requesting initiation of land acquisition proceedings and compensation. However, the authorities have neither started acquisition proceedings nor paid compensation. The petitioners, belonging to Sq[reduled Tribes and being landless poor, depend solelv on NBK. J wp 5.198 l0 15 agriculture for their livelihood and requested either compensatlon or allotment of equal land in the same village Hence' this Writ Petition.
2. Hearcl Sri K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Nandigam Krishna Rao, iearned Standing Counsel for Singareni Collieries for respondent Nos 5 and 6' Perused the record 3'Learneclcounselforpetitionerssubmitsthatrespondent Nos.S ald 6 acquired Acs 15-38 guntas of assigned land in Survey No.244 12, situated at Usirikayalapalli of Singareni Mandal' Khammam District, u'ithout initiating arry land acqulsltlon extent of proceedings or paving compensation or allottinC iqual 4 1n Learned counsel tbr respondent No'6 submits that the lands Survel' No.244 were acquired during 199 5-96 and the petitioners filing this u'rit petition in the year 2O15 with a delay of 20 years after land acquisition, is time barred as per provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 3 NBK. J \\,p 5198 l0t5
5. In view of the facts and circumstancr:s of the case, and upon perusal of the materiai placed on record, it is evident that the lands in question were acquired during the year 1995_96. The petitioners approached this Court only in 2O 15, nearly 2O years later, ',vithout offering any justifiable explanation for the inordinate delay. Further, there is no material to show that the acquisition r,i.as challenged earlier or that any legal steps were taken b-v petitioners within a reasonable time. Even assuming the lands were assigned in i9g4, petitioners did not assert any right or seek legal recourse until decades later. The claim, therefore, is hopelessly barred by limitation and suffers fr6m gross delay and laches. With regard to the aspect of delay, it is to be noted that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.tOAg of 2018 and 593 of 20 16, held that a delay of 5 to 18 years in preferring a writ petition constitutes inordinate delay. However, in the instant case, there is a delay of twenty years in approaching this court, which is clearry excessive ald unjustified. Thus, the writ petition is riable to be dismissed on the aspect of delay and jaches. 6 Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no orders as to costs. 1 NBK. J wp 5498 2015 1 Miscellaneous petitions pending' if anY''shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY/ ', -- ' R';ti.'#Ni'A:t'EFRIX (rz SECTION OFFICER 'O',,. ON" CC tO SRI K'VENUMADHAV' AdVOCAIE IOPUC]
2. OneCC to SRI NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO' SC FOR SCCL [OPUC] ? Two ccs to Gp FoR REVEN,E, High court for the state of rerangana at HYderabad [OUTI 4 BSR L Two CD CoPies s I HIGH COURT DATED:30 t0712025 I ORDER WP.No.5498 of 2015 j,\ r .- )' \ !) 16SEPM ,} 'r v z a) * o€sprl c.rEo t_' * I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS \b { I