Kududula Laxmi, v. The Dist. Collector, Land Acquisition,Karimnagar, And Another,

[ 33e3 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT APPEAL NO: 684 OF 2014 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent appeal preferred against the order dt.1 1-03-2014 in WP.No.600 of 2011 . on the file of the High Court. Between:

Kududula Laxmi, Wo- Laxmaiah, aged about 45 years, Occupation Agriculture, Ri./o. Varadavelli Village, Boinipalli Mandal, Karimnagar District. ...APPELLANT/WRIT PETITIONER AND

1. The District Collector Land Acquisition , (LA), Karimnagar District, Karminagar

2. Jhe La.n_d Acquisition Officer - cum - Rgvenue, Divisional Officer, Sircilla, District Karimnagar'

...RES'.NDENT'/RES,.NDENTS l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WAMP . NO: 1469 OF 20141 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 direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac.2-23 guntas in Sy. No 51 of Varadavelli Village, Boinipally Mandal, Karimangar District pending disposal of the writ appeal Counsel for the Appellant: M/s. BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

THE HON'BLE TTIE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTTCE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT APPEAL No.684 of 2014 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe) None for the parties.

2.

This intra court appeal emanates from an order dated 11.03.2014 passed by the leamed Single Judge by which Writ Petition No.600 of 201I preferred by the appellant has been dismissed.

3.

Facts giving rise to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that appellant and her husband *.." J*n"., of land measuring Acs.1 .23 guntas in Survey No.51 of Vardavelli Village. Out of the aforesaid land, the appellant is the owner of land measuring Acs.2.23 guntas. The aforesaid land along with other lands approximately measuring Acs.l03.l4 guntas was required for rehabilitating the project displaced families of Mid Manair Reservoir.

4. It is the case of the appellant that the appellant and her husband agreed for acquisition of 5 acres of land provided the

CJ & JAX, J w.A.No.684 of 2014 respondents agree to not to acquire the land measuring Acs.2.23 guntas. According to the appellant, consent award in respect of land measuring Acs.5.00 was passed. Thereafter, a notification dated 13.09.2008 under Section a(l) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), was issued which was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 13.11.2008. Thereafter, an Award was passed on29.l1.2010.

5.

The appellant was served with the notice of the Award under Section l2(2) of the Act on 11.12.2010. The appellant thereafter obtained the copy of the Award and has filed the Writ Petition challenging the validity of thd notification under Section a(l) of the Act dated 13.09.2008, declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 13.11.2008 and Award dated 2g.ll.2}l}. The learned Single Judge by an order dated 11.03.2014 has dismissed the Writ Petition' In the aforesaid factual background, this Writ Appeal has been filed'

6. None has appeared for the parties. Therefore, this Court has perused the record.

()J & JAK, J w.A No.684 ol20l4 J

7. The Award dated 29.11.2010 has been challenged on behalf of the appellant primarily on the ground that the same was passed beyond the period of two (2) years from the date of publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Act.

8. Admittedly, the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 13.09.2008. Thereafter, the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 13.11.2008. However, the substance of the notification was published in the locality only on 30.11.2008. Thereafter, the Award was approved on 29.11.2010 and has beej passed on the same day. Thus, the Award has been made within a period of two (2) years as contemplated under Section I I A of the Act. Therefore, the contention urged on behalfofthe appellant that the land acquisition proceeding is lapsed under Section 11A of the Act is misconceived. We have perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge. We are in agreement with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge that the land belonging to the appellant measuring Acs.2.23 guntas could not have been excluded from acquisition as the same was situated

,r CJ & JAX, J w.A No.684 of 20I4 contiguous to the lands already acquired and the land belonging to the appellant has been acquired in consonance with the provisions of the Act

9. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal.

10. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/-V.HARI PRA ASSISTANT REGIS AR //TRUE COPY'

SECTION OFFICER To, Two CCs to GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 'High Court for the State of l* [t8t ; il,!]S ft ..f Ext,]t%'rXs s o c r ArE S' Ad vo cate to P U Cl J w Two CD CoPies BM

) HIGH COURT HCJ & JAK,J DATED:0410412024 1rE STa 16: oA ( oo 12 JUL 202[ (l , ,"C:-/'

oESp/\T

ORDER

WA.No.684 of 2014 DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS 6..C+ F*w