Smt. Gali Ramakka v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9812 OF 2017 ORDER:

The case of the petitioner is that she is the absolute owner and possessor of the agricultural lands in Survey Nos.334/1,334/3, 335/7,335/8,335/9, 335/10, 335/11 and 335/12, admeasuring Ac.0.36 cents each and total extent is Ac.2.88 cents, situated at Meriapaka Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District; that the said lands were assigned to her and that D-Form patta was also issued to the petitioner. The revenue officials also issued pattadar pass books and title deeds to the petitioner. While so, when the Government has proposed to establish Indian Institute of Technology in an extent of 400 acres, wherein the petitioner's land was also proposed to resume, the petitioner gave consent to give up her entire land.

The grievance of the petitioner is that though the petitioner gave consent for acquisition of entire land, the 4th respondent issued notice dated 29.12.2014 for resumption of land to an extent of Ac.1.80 cents. Thereafter, the respondent authorities have resumed the petitioner's land leaving the remaining extent of Ac.1.80 cents and proceeded to raise the fencing around the entire land acquired for the purpose of IIT. Due to such acquisition and raising the fencing, there is no way left to reach to petitioner's remaining extent of land.

extent of Ac.1.80 cents duly paying the exgratia or else to provide the road to reach her aforesaid reaming land. In pursuance of the same, the 2nd respondent vide his letter dated 2.06.2016 forwarded petitioner's representation to the 3rd respondent and requested to take necessary action. But, the 3rd respondent has not taken any action. As such, the petitioner made another representation dated 05.12.2016 to the 3rd respondent and requested to resume the remaining extent of land or to provide the road to reach that land. But, the 3rd respondent neither passed any order nor given any response. As such, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Heard both sides.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and take appropriate action, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 06.04.2017 tk