Putta Kishore Kumar v. 1. The State ol Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lt:e- Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 in trying to disburse the compensation amount pertaining to the house bearing no.3-1-7 admeasuring 178-78 sq. yds contains two portions of RCC building situated in Sy. No.121l13lPlB1(121113P), Gramakantam of Bhadrachalam Town, 3rd ward, Opposite Ramalayam, Badrachalam Town and Mandal, Badradri Kothagudem l; District in-favour of respondents 6 and 7 purusant to land acquisition notification issued in proceedings Rc. No.C/127312024, dated 08.11.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and also voilative of the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Act, 2O13 and further also contrary to the articles 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents 3 to 5 to pay the compensation amount pertaining to the house bearing no. 3-1-7 admeasuring 178-78 sq. yds contains two portions of RCC building situated in Sy. No.'l21l13lPlB1(121113P), Gramakantam of Bhadrachalam Town 3rd ward, Opposite Ramalayam, Badrachalam Town and Mandal, Badradri Kothagudem District.' 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 direct the respondents 3 to 5 to pay the compensation amount pertaining to the house bearing no. 3-1-7 admeasuring 178-78 sq. yds contains two portions of RCC building in Sy. No.121l13lPlB1(121113P), Gramakantam of Bhadrachalam Town 3rd ward, Opposite Ramaiayam, Badrachalam Town and Mandal, Badradri Kothagudem District in-favour of respondents 6 and 7. pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T. VASANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.3 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI P.V. RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.7: - - - - The Court made the following: ORDER I ,i '-7 ,1. ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T, VINOD KUMAR Writ P tition No.241 f 2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent Nos.l to 5 and Sri P.V.Ramana, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 through Hybrid Mode and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the /s involved, this Court is of the view that-notice to unofficial respondent No.7 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. Shorn of unnecessary detaits, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the respondents-authorities, in particular respondent Nos.3 to 5, on issuing preliminary notification, dt.08.1t.2024, seeking to acquire the land to an extent of Ac.0.321/z guntas situated at Bhadrachalam Village and Mandal, for the purpose of Development of Tourisrn and Social Economic Infrastructure, are trying to disburse the compensation amount in favour of unofficial respondent Nos.6 and 7 without considering the representation of the petitioner dt.14.12.2024 and also without taking note of pendency of civil suits, tzrileO.S.Nos.354 of 2016 and 527 of 202O z on the file of the Special Assistant Agent and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam, which action of the respondents, it is I contended as highty illegal and arbitrary.

4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 by placing on record the written instructions dt.02.01.2025 under the signature of the 4th respondent, would submlt that the petitioner had submitted his representation on 10.12.2024, claiming to have purchased the schedule property on 11.06.2006 from one Konjerla Venkateswarlu and the said sale was not registered.

5. By the written instructions, it is further stated that thereafter the petitioner filed another application dt.17.t2.2024, claiming that he has got the aforesaid property under a Will dt.30.09.2006 and thus, he is entitled for being considered for payment of compensation; that the land acquisition proceedings initiated are only at a preliminary notification stage; and that the authorities have not passed any award for the petitioner to approach this Court claiming that the respondents-authorities are trying to disburse the compensation amount in favour of the unofficial respondents.

6. By the written instructions, it is further contended that the authorities while taking further action pursuant to preliminary notification dt.08.1L.2024 would duly consider the objections filed by the petitioner to 3 the notification and take further action in accordance with law and thus, the Writ Petition as filed is premature.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.6 submits that as the subject land is situated in scheduled area, no transaction of sale or purchase can take place other than between Tribals as per Regulation I of 1970 and that the claim of the petitioner having purchased the subject property in the year 2006 or having got the said property under a Will cannot be accepted being a non-tribal.

8. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

9. Though the petitioner claims of the respondents-authorities trying to disburse the compensation amount upon issuance of preliminary notification, it is to be noted that merely on issuance of a preliminary notification, it cannot be said that the authorities having concluded land acquisition proceedings or resumption proceedings for them to make the payment of compensation/exgratia. Insofar as resurnption proceedings are concerned, the authorities are required to follow various stages as prescribed under the Right to Fair Compensation aM Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Respondent-settlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'the Act'), before making the payment of compensation/ex-gratia and no compensation amount/ex-gratia can be paid giving a goby to the procedure prescribed under the Act. I L 4

10. Since, the petitioner claims of respondent Nos.3 to 5 trying to disburse compensation amount in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7, and as the respondents by the written instructions as placed on record of this court have indicated that the respondents-authorities wourd consider the objections filed by the petitioner on ro.lz.2o24, this court is of the view that the respondent are to be directed to consider the aforesaid objections while taking further action, pursuant to the preliminary notification dt.08.11.2024 and take further steps in accordance with law.

11. Subject to above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

12. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER District. nijq,jiiiiioiil. oi. e.n. Ambedkar secretariat, Hvderabad' c'Cr-n., nlitwdy station Road, Nampally, Hyderabad'

1. The Principal Secretary, The State of Telangana, Revenue Department (Land ' 2. fi;-1-!.il Acqr"ition,'n"tioiiitatLn ana Reseilement Authority, office of - e. irre oistrict cotrectoi, baaradri Xotiragijaem District at KotheqYgqf ;: iii; n"*nue oivisionat-Officer / LAOi Badrachalam' Badradri Kothagudem s. ine iGsifoar, Badrachalam, Badradri Kothagudem District' 6. d; CCio s*T,vASANTHA RAo, Advocate LgPUcl i: on; cc io SRt P.v. RAMANA, Advqcqle-[oPUcl g. i;; ccsio-ci roi ldciri'f WEiFenEl xigr' iourt ror the State or s. iil;'ic;'i"EF ion REVENUE, High court for the state of Telangana. 'l0.Two CD Copies Telanqana. [OUTI tOUI \ To, BN BS 5 HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 ORDER WP.No.241 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS e9"i* K. STA I 2 7 JAN 2025 (,) , l I