The State Of Telangana vs Dadanpally Nirvasithula Welfare ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1809 Tel

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI



         W.A.Nos.272, 274, 275 and 277 of 2022

COMMON JUDGMENT:     (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


      Regard being had to the controversy involved in the

aforesaid cases, they are heard together and are being

decided by a common judgment.

      The facts of W.A.No.274 of 2022 are reproduced as

under:

      The facts of the case reveal that on account of an

irrigation project known as "Priyadarshini Jurala Project",

large number of people were displaced in the Dharoor

Mandal of Mahabubnagar District.                   Their houses came

under submergence and in those circumstances, keeping

in view the Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) Policy,

the    Government    has       issued         G.O.Ms.No.68,               dated

08.04.2005 for grant of rehabilitation package to project

affected families and project displaced families.                            The

members of the respondent/writ petitioner are people

belonging to lower strata of the society, most of them live in

a single room house surviving on the daily wages earned by

them and the learned Single Judge, as a Government

Order was issued i.e., G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 08.04.2005,

has allowed the writ petition directing the respondents

therein to extend the benefits as provided under Clauses

6.3, 6.7 and 6.8 of G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 08.04.2005.

Clauses 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.7 and 6.8 of the R&R Policy,

2005, issued vide G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 08.04.2005, are

reproduced as under:-

"6.1 The Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) benefits shall be extended to all the Project Affected Families (PAF's) and Project Displaced Families (PDF's) whether belonging to below poverty line (BPL) or non-BPL except to the extent where specifically restrictions mentioned in the policy.

6.2 "Allotment of house site/payment of exgratia

a) Any Project Displaced Family (PDF) holding up to an area of 5 Cents of village site and whose site has been acquired shall be allotted house site of an extent of 202 square meters (5 Cents) of land in rural areas of 75 square meters of land in Urban areas in the Resettlement zone besides payment of compensation for the structures if any therein;

a1) Where any such PDF as defined above desires to migrate and settle at the place of his/her choice, cash of compensation in lieu of house site as applicable in the resettlement Zone shall be paid besides payment of compensation for the structures therein and in case the

PDF belongs to BPL category, they shall be give suitable one time financial assistance for house construction including cost of sanitary latrine as fixed by the Government from time to time.

b. In case if any Project Displaced Family (PDF) holds village site of more than 5 cents, such holder shall be allotted village house site of an extent of 202 Square Meters (5 cents) of land in rural areas or 75 Square Meters of land in Urban areas in the Resettlement zone and also be paid exgratia for the site in excess of 5 Cents (for example if a family holds village site of 20 Cents in Project Affected Zone and have two major sons, residing with such person in case, they take 3 house sites of 5 Cents each in Resettlement zone, they will get exgratia for the balance of 5 Cents (20 Cents 3x5 cents = 15 cents); and

c. The Compensation/exgratia payable as above shall be on par with the package deal payable in case of acquisition of private/patta lands.

6.3 Grant for House construction:

Each PDF of BPL category who has been allotted free house site under section 6.2 shall get a One time financial assistance of Rs.40,000 (Rupees Forty thousand only) shall be increased to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only). This increase will have prospective effect. A sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) is granted to those who have already shifted houses from 8-4-2005 to 10-12-2007. Apart from the above, a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) would be allowed in addition to the housing grant as per G.O.Ms.No.68, dt:8-4-2005. The above increase shall come into force with retrospective effect i.e., the date of issue of G.O.Ms.No.68, dt:8-4-2005.

6.7 Grant for cattle shed: Each affected family that is displaced and has cattle, shall get financial assistance of such amount as the appropriate Government may decide but not less than Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) for construction of cattle shed.

6.8 Grant for Transporting materials: Each PAF shall get lump sum one time financial assistance of Rs.5000/- or as fixed by Government from time to time for transportation/shifting of his building materials, belongings and cattle etc. from the affected zone to the resettlement zone."

Another important aspect of the case is that the

villagers were granted house sites under G.O.Ms.No.11,

dated 19.01.2004 and therefore, in the considered opinion

of this Court, once they were granted house sites, the

learned Single Judge was justified in holding that they are

entitled for other benefits also as per G.O.Ms.No.68, dated

08.04.2005. The operative portion of the order passed by

the learned Single Judge is reproduced as under:-

"At the hearing, it has come out that the petitioners were granted house sites under G.O.Ms.No.11, Irrigation & CAD (PW.LA IV-R&R) Department, dated 19.01.2004.

As the petitioners have not been extended the other benefits under G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 08.04.2005, for the purpose of construction of houses, the writ petitions are allowed by directing the respondents to

extend to the members of the petitioners-associations the other benefits envisaged under Clauses-6.3, 6.07 and 6.8 of G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 08.04.2005, (supra) after verification of their claims and on being satisfied that their Villages were submerged/acquired under the acquisition. The respondents shall complete this exercise and extend the benefits within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

As a sequel to disposal of the writ petitions, all the pending interlocutory applications shall stand disposed of as infructuous."

In the considered opinion of this Court, the State has

not been able to make out any case for interference with

the order passed by the learned Single Judge as it is based

upon the Government Order issued by the State

Government under the R&R policy. It is the duty of the

State to rehabilitate its citizens in case their houses come

under submergence or their land has been acquired,

keeping in view the R&R policy. No case for interference is

made out in the matter and the order passed by the

learned Single Judge is upheld.

The writ appeals are accordingly dismissed.

It is really unfortunate that the displaced families

came up before this Court in the years 2011 and 2012 and

the order was passed in the year 2015. Thereafter, the writ

appeals were preferred in the year 2016 and in spite of the

fact that there was no interim order, the State has not

implemented the order passed by the learned Single Judge

by which three months time was granted to the State

Government.

Resultantly, as the order passed by the learned

Single Judge has not been complied with, two months time

is granted to the State Government to comply the order

passed by the learned Single Judge, failing which this

Court shall be initiating suo motu contempt proceedings

against the appellants.

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

______________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 11.04.2022 vs