THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.377 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the
appellant.
2. Appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 13.12.2022
passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing
W.P.No.34062 of 2022 filed by the appellant as the writ
petitioner.
3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition seeking
the following relief:
To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus
declaring the action of respondent No.4 in non-
considering the representation of the petitioner and non- initiating and legal notice of the petitioner and non- initiating to grant the compensation to the petitioner on his land to an extent of Ac.0.20 gts in Sy.No 33/U/1 2 which is situated at Garlapad revenue Village shivar of Dharur Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, which is acquired under the land acquisition program for construction of Priyadarshini Jurala Project and granted the compensation on the name of respondents No.7 to 12 by illegally instead of the name of petitioner and going to pay the compensation to them on the land of the petitioner is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and violation of provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.4 to grant compensation to the petitioner on his land which was acquired under land acquisition program to construct the Priyadharshini Jurala Project and to cancel the illegal allotment of compensation on the name of respondents No.7 to 12 as they do not have any title or patta.
4. Learned Single Judge vide the aforesaid order dated 13.12.2022 dismissed the writ petition in the following manner:
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in not initiating steps for grant of compensation to the petitioner in respect of land admeasuring Ac.0.20 gts situated in Survey No.33/U/1 3 of Garlapad Revenue Village, Darur Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land having succeeded the same from his ancestors and also claims that his name is entered in the revenue records and he was also issued pattadar pass books.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the said land was submerged in Priyadarshini Jurala Project at Revulapally Village and the same was acquired by the respondents and basing on the false representation made by the respondents 7 to 12, the compensation was paid in favour of the respondents 7 to 12 herein without verifying the title over the said extent of land.
4. From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that the said acquisition has taken place long before almost a decade back and the petitioner herein approached this Court now making a claim for compensation in respect of the compensation, which was already paid in favour of the respondents 7 to 12 a decade back. In view of the abnormal delay in approaching this Court and making a claim for compensation by the petitioner in respect of the subject land, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
45. Learned Single Judge noted that the land acquisition had taken place almost a decade ago, whereas appellant had approached the Court claiming compensation after an inordinate delay. Therefore, learned Single Judge declined to invoke his discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismissed the writ petition.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that despite the appellant being the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.0.20 guntas situated in Survey No.33/U/1 of Garlapad Revenue Village, Darur Mandal, Jogulamba Gadwal District, he had not been paid any compensation, instead compensation was wrongly paid to respondents No.7 to 12 without verifying the title.
7. We have gone through the writ affidavit filed by the appellant in support of the writ petition. The writ affidavit is devoid of any material particulars, including the date of the award passed. All that it says is that when appellant came to know that his land was acquired for which compensation was paid to respondents No.7 to 12, he had 5 approached his counsel who issued a legal notice on 02.08.2022 whereafter the writ petition came to be filed.
8. Interestingly, we find that in the verification column of the writ affidavit though the exact date was not mentioned, it was typed as July, 2022. In other words, the writ petition was ready for filing even before the legal notice was issued on 02.08.2022.
9. Be that as it may, we find that award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and Special Deputy Collector, Gadwal, on 07.02.2012. On perusal of the award, we find that draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was issued on 23.11.2009 whereafter draft declaration was issued on 01.01.2010. It is not possible to agree with the contention advanced on behalf of the appellant that appellant was totally oblivious of the land acquisition proceedings.
10. However, appellant had his remedy under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. But instead 6 of availing the remedy provided under the statute, appellant had slept over his rights, if any, and after an inordinate delay, filed the related writ petition which was rightly rejected by the learned Single Judge.
11. We find no merit in the writ appeal and the same is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 23.03.2023 vs