Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Modiyam Challayya vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 July, 2021
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.19589 OF 2017
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India 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 3rd respondent by issuing irregular
common award No.23/2016 vide Roc.No.2000/4/2015/B,
dt.10.11.2016 in respect of petitioners 1 and 2 lands i.e., to
an extent of Ac.0.61 cents out of Ac.3.58 cents in
R.S.No.11P and extent Ac 0 50 cents out of Ac 3 58 cent in
R S No 11P and Ac.0.50 cents out Ac.3.58 cents in
R.S.No.11P and Petitioners 3 and 4 lands i.e., an extent of
Ac.2.20 cents in Sy.No.1P an extent of Ac.3.70 cents in
Sy.No.1P an extent of Ac.0.80 cents in Sy.No.1P an extent
of Ac.0.60 cents in Sy.No.1P Ac.1.65 cents in Sy.No.18-C
Ac.2.40 cents in R.S.No.34-C an extent of Ac.0.56 cents in
R.S.No.35/2P and Ac.0.69 cents in R.S.No.35/1C and the
petitioners 5 and 6 lands i.e., an extent of Ac.1.50 cents
out of Ac.21.24 cents Ac.1.90 cents out of Ac.21.24 and
Ac.1.10 cents all in R.S.No.18-P which all the lands are
situated at Chintalagudem Village, Buttayagudem Mandal,
West Godavari District, by not considering
representation/objection dt.25.01.2016 and 18.04.2017 of
the petitioners against the Primary Notification vide
Rc.No.G3/E13360/2015 in Form No.VIA dated 15.01.2016
issued by the 2nd respondent to their acquired lands as
illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional as well as violation of
under Section 151 of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 (No.30 of 2013) and consequently
set aside an irregular award No.23/2016 vide
Roc.No.2000/4/2015/B dt.10.11.2016 issued by
3rd respondent and direct to the 3rd respondent to
consider the representations/objections dated 25.01.2016
18.04.2017 of petitioners by disallowing the illegal claims
of the respondents 5 to 15..."
2. Though the petitioners made several allegations against the
respondents, during hearing, Sri K.J.N.Pundareekakshudu, learned
counsel for petitioners limited his request to dispose of the
representations, dated 25.01.2016 and 18.04.2017 submitted by the
petitioners, without touching the merits of the case.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing
for respondents readily agreed to dispose of the
representations, dated 25.01.2016 and 18.04.2017 submitted by the
petitioners, if any, pending with the respondent-authorities.
4. Recording the submissions of the learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Revenue, I need not decide the truth or
otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is
conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the judgment
of the Apex Court in "The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1",
wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick
or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions.
But, they do no service to the cause of justice. As the learned
counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to
dispose of the representations, dated 25.01.2016 and 18.04.2017
submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, I find no
other alternative, except to issue such direction.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the
respondent authorities to consider representations, dated
25.01.2016 and 18.04.2017 submitted by the petitioners and pass
appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within four (04) weeks
from today. No costs.
As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 26.07.2021
IS
2019 (8) SCALE 544
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.19589 OF 2017
Date: 26.07.2021
IS
