High Court for State of TelanganaWP/34763/2011ordered

Md. Nayeemuddin v. The Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh

2017-09-07S.V.Bhatt8 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.34763 of 2011 ORDER:

Heard Mr. Wasim Ahmed Khan, for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for the respondents.

The petitioners pray for the following reliefs: "(a) To call for the records in proceeding No.C/294/2010 dt: NIL-11-2011 on the file of the Collector and District Magistrate, R.R. District/Respondent No.2 and other connected records from the Respondent No.2.

b) To quash impugned order in proceeding No.C/294/2010 dt: NIL-11-2011, on the file of the Collector District Magistrate, R.R.

District/Respondent No.2 by declaring it as illegal and unconstitutional.

c) To consequently quash the draft declaration under Section Land Acquisition Act in File.No.C/294/2010 issued by the Respondent No.2 which was published in Indian Express English Daily on 19-12-2011.

d) To set-aside the Form 7 notice no. C/294/2010 dt: 1712-2010 issued under Section 9 (3) and 10 of Land Acquisition Act."

The counsel for petitioners confines his submissions to the irregularity and illegality, viz., in the enquiry conducted under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), and non-consideration of objections raised by the petitioners, accepting the report of Land Acquisition Officer and failure to express independent view by the Collector, while issuing

>>2<< proceedings No.C/294/2010, dated Nill.11.2011. To bring home this contention, the counsel relies on the following portion of the consideration communicated to the petitioners: Contention of the objection petitioner Remarks of the L.A.O.

Orders of the District Collector They stated that the proposed The GHMC, Hyderabad prepared The land is and approved a Road Development required for acquisition is consequent upon the Plan for the proposed Road widening directions of the Hon'ble High Court public purpose at Moula Ali Kaman in view of the i.e. for road vide order dt. 13-04-2010, wherein direction of the Hon'ble High Court widening for the division bench was pleased to of A.P. in W.P.No. 12054 of 2009 for free flow of record statement protection Heritage traffic.

Government to form slip service Archeological structure of Moula Ali roads, but not for formation of new Kaman and keeping in view of the roads in order to protect the ancient Public Safety avoid frequent structure i.e. Kaman. Hence the accidents and for free flow of traffic.

reasonable area according to 20-25 feet is more adequate for free flow of The Road Development plan was traffic.

prepared without any favour to any The extent of acquisition of 50 community or persons and further restricting damage / loss of private feet on both sides particularly on properties to the minimum extent.

the left side of the Kamaan, the The petitioner may approach the existing mosque and Ashoor Khana would be affected and have an authorities concerned to rectify the impact of affecting the religious correct Survey numbers etc, duly rights to perform Namaz and there furnishing her title deeds before the will be no Vacant place available on authorities.

left side, particularly in Namaz hours traffic problem will particularly in Namaz hours traffic problem will arise.

Further it is stated that the Kaman is repaired there is no need of road widening and the road widening on right side in the plan showed it is up to Ali Mutton shop, but it was extended. Further the alignment on both sides should be same i.e. up to Vijay Fabrications.

Further the applicant Smt. G.

>>3<< Kavitha is stated that correct Survey Numbers of the property belonging to her were not notified though correct name was mentioned under the same and requested drop acquisition proceedings.

The Road widening work will be The other taken up as per alignment as per claims shall be Road development plan only, the examined by affected parties will be compensated the LAO during by payment for the loss of property award enquiry.

under the Land Acquisition Act. The value of the land will be assessed as per the provisions under L.A. Act manual principles practice by collecting registered sales transaction for proceeding (3) years from the date of Draft Notification.

The structural values will be assessed by the concerned Executive Engineer basing on the Price index / Guide lines issued by Government and the same will be awarded. Hence the request of the Petitioner cannot be considered in the larger interest of the public.

>>4<< The GHMC, Hyderabad prepared The Road plan They stated that in the name of Road widening their shops are and approved a Road Development is prepared without any targeted, because they have Plan for the proposed Road widening questioned the high handed action at Moula Ali Kaman in view of the favour to any of the M.C.H who are trying to take direction of the Hon'ble High Court community.

their properties with forcibly of A.P. in W.P.No. 12054 of 2009 for possession. It is a counter blast to protection Heritage the Writ Petition 1729/2010 filed Archaeological structure of Moula Ali by our neighbour in the High Court.

Kaman and keeping in view of the The GHMC authorities have Public Safety avoid frequent accidents and for free flow of traffic.

targeted one side with wrong measurements towards their side The Road Development plan was and taking less area from opposite prepared without any favour to any side their property.

The community or persons and further acquisition is not in the public restricting damage / loss of private interest, but to appease particular properties to the minimum extent.

section of their community, by the influential political parties The Road widening work will be The structural proposed to lay slip roads around taken up as per alignment as per value will be the above Kaman which are lay slip Road development plan only, the compensated as roads around the above Kaman affected parties will be compensated per LA Act and which are not required if the by payment for the loss of property rules and Kaman is renovated. There is also under the Land Acquisition Act. The prevailing guide Masjid near Kaman which cannot value of the land will be assessed as lines.

be demolished and it will not help per the provisions under L.A. Act in easing out traffic or widening of manual principles the road and requested to drop the practice by collecting registered sales acquisition proceedings.

transaction for proceeding (3) years from the date of Draft Notification.

Counsel for the petitioners places reliance on the following decisions of the Apex Court:

>>5<< (i) Gurbinder Kaur Brar and another Vs. Union of India and others1 (ii) Kamal Trading Private Limited (Now known as Manav Investment and Trading Company Limited) Vs. State of West Bengal and others2 (iii) Usha Stud and Agricultural Farms Private Limited and others Vs. State of Haryana and others3 (iv) Surinder Singh Brar and others Vs. Union of India and others4 (v) Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Darius Shapur Chenai and others5 He prays for setting aside the proceedings impugned in the writ petition.

The Government Pleader for Land Acquisition contends that in the case on hand, the consideration of objections, though appear to be brief and precise, keeping in perspective the purpose of acquisition, the confirmation of view of the Land Acquisition Officer by the District Collector amounts to proper consideration no exception proceedings No.C/294/2010, dated Nil.11.2011, can be taken. The counsel further tries to justify the proceeding impugned in the writ petition by relying on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. 6.

The scope, the object and the purpose of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and considered in a catena of 1 (2013) 11 Supreme Court Cases 228 2 (2012) 2 Supreme Court Cases 25 3 (2013) 4 Supreme Court Cases 210 4 (2013) 1 Supreme Court Cases 403 5 (2005) 7 Supreme Court Cases 627

>>6<< decisions, I do not propose to burden the present order by excerpting the well established proposition of law. Further, on the binding precedents relied on by the petitioners, the respondents are not disputing, however, distinguish the applicability of these decisions by contending that the case on hand does not suffer from the infirmity, which was considered in the reported cases. 7.

The point for consideration is in a limited sphere. The grievance of the petitioners is that their objections are not either considered or objections are rejected by reasons recorded by the District Collector. This contention is examined from the very proceeding through which the objections are considered and outcome communicated to a party. By way of illustration, a portion of consideration by District Collector is excerpted above and prima facie, this Court is satisfied that the District Collector/2nd respondent could have discharged the statutory function in the manner laid down by law and held by decisions reported above, if independent consideration of objections is made and a view expressed. Such approach is absent in the order No.C/294/2010, dated Nil-11-2011.

For the above reasons, I am satisfied the proceedings No.C/294/2010, dated Nil.11.2011, set aside. The matter remitted to 2nd respondent for consideration and disposal, in accordance with law. As this Court has set aside the proceeding No.C/294/2010, dated Nil.11.2011, as a corollary, draft declaration in File No.C/294/20010, dated 19.12.2011, is set aside. The respondents are given liberty to proceed from the stage where it is interdicted by this Court, in accordance with law.

>>7<< 9.

The Writ Petition is ordered, as indicated above. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ S.V. BHATT, J Date: 7th September, 2017 KL

>>8<< HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.34763 of 2011 Date: 7th September, 2017 KL