THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No.891 of 2011
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)
Mr. N.Rishi Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellants.
Mr. Nazir Ahmed Khan, learned Government Pleader
for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department for
the respondents.
2. This intra Court appeal has been filed against the
order dated 22.07.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge
by which the writ petition preferred by the appellants has
been disposed of.
3. Facts
giving rise to filing of this writ appeal briefly stated are that the appellants claim to be owners of the land bearing Survey Nos.81, 82, 88, 336, 337 and 344 of Ippalapally Village of Thimmajipet Mandal in Mahabubnagar District. According to the appellants, part 2 of the land belonging to them was utilised for construction of the road without payment of any compensation to them.
4. The appellants thereupon filed the writ petition before this Court seeking to declare the action of the respondents in laying two roads on the land belonging to the appellants without initiating proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
5. The learned Single Judge by the order dated 22.07.2010 has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents not to undertake improvement of the existing road without obtaining the consent of the appellants.
6. In the aforesaid factual background, this writ appeal has been filed.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the land belonging to the appellants cannot be utilised for purposes of laying down the road without payment of compensation to them.
3
8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader has invited the attention of this Court to the letter dated 21.10.2021 annexed to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents and it has been pointed out that since the respondents had agreed to lay a fence on the land belonging to the appellants, the appellants had agreed for strengthening the road without claiming any compensation.
9. We have considered the rival submissions made on both sides and have perused the record.
10. On perusal of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents as well as the letter dated 21.10.2021, it is evident that the respondents had agreed that the road, which was existing on the land, could be strengthened. The appellants have given no objection for strengthening the road subject to the condition that the respondents shall provide fencing around the land of the appellants.
11. The aforesaid conduct of the appellants disentitle them to claim compensation.
4
12. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any ground to differ with the view taken by the learned Single Judge.
13. In the result, the writ appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ ______________________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J 20.10.2023 vs