Tunuguntla Prabhakara Rao v. The Union Of India,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT W.P.No.550 OF 2017 ORDER:

Heard Mr.L.Shantaram for petitioner and Mr.S.S.Varma for respondents 2 and 3.

The petitioner challenges notification dated 02.12.2015 on various factual and legal grounds. During and in the course of submissions, learned counsel for petitioner confines the grievance of petitioner to the inaction of respondents in firstly furnishing the details on the exact extent of land they are proposing to acquire and the probable compensation that will be paid thereafter. Learned standing counsel submits that if the petitioner makes a request for these details, respondents 2 and 3 will furnish necessary details without loss of time. The statement is placed on record.

Petitioner is given liberty to apply to respondents 2 and 3 the information he desires to seek in this behalf by enclosing a copy of this order. On receipt of representation, respondents 2 and 3 are directed to furnish the information within four corners of law. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.

____________ S.V.BHATT, J 05th January, 2016 Lrkm