High Court for State of TelanganaWP/35452/2015disposed of no costs

Pamidi Appalanarasaiah v. The District Collector

2015-10-30Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 35452 of 2015 BETWEEN P.Appalanarasaiah and others ... PETITIONERS AND The District Collector and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 30.10.2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Petitioners, who are brothers, claim to own Ac.4-38 cents in survey No.530 of Illaparru Village of Nandiwada Mandal, Krishna District, for the

purpose of Channelisation and Moderanisation of Budameru Drain. Petitioners' land of Ac.1-44 cents was proposed to be acquired by notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 01.10.2012. During the enquiry under Section 5-A conducted by the Collector and District Magistrate on 18.08.2013, petitioners appeared and represented that the balance land will be rendered unusuable and requested the Collector to acquire the balance land as well for which the Executive Engineer, Drainage Division, Gudivada, stated to have given consent and thereby notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 29.10.2013 by the Collector, Krishna District for the entire Ac.4-38 cents. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that in spite of making a representation to the Land Acquisition Officer as well as the Collector on 31.08.2015 seeking compensation, no amount is paid to the petitioners.

3. Petitioners' representation is filed along with the writ petition. As there is no controversy with regard to acquisition of petitioners' land of Ac.4-38 cents, as referred to above, it would be just and appropriate to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the aforesaid representation of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders with regard to their request for grant of compensation expeditiously.

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 30, 2015 LMV