Siddenki Estari vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 4706 Tel

          THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

                  WRIT PETITION No.35865 of 2022
ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of

respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Government Pleader for

Irrigation appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.4 to 6.

2. This writ petition is filed praying to grant the following

relief:

"...to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, by declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation and all consequential benefits, for the lands of the petitioners which were acquired, situated in Mangurla Village, Jainad Mandal, Adilabad District, for the purpose of formation of Sathanala Project under Land Acquisition Act, even after completion of ceiling dispute as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 21, 300-A & 31-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the compensation with all consequential benefits including interest and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that in respect

of lands situated in the very same Village, this Court, by order

dated 19.11.2016 in W.P.No.8506 of 2007, has passed orders 2 AAR, J W.P.No.35865 of 2018

directing the authorities concerned to initiate land acquisition

proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Right to

Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, by fixing a time

frame. Learned counsel further stated that the petitioners

herein are also similarly situated persons and their lands are

also in the very same village i.e., Mangurla Village, Jainath

Mandal, Adilabad District.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition has not

disputed about the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.8506

of 2007, dated 19.11.2016.

5. Having regard to the orders passed by this Court in

W.P.No.8506 of 2007, dated 19.11.2016, this Court is of the

prima facie opinion that ends of justice would be met, if the

respondent authorities are directed to dispose of the

representations made by the petitioners to respondent No.1

within a time frame.

6. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the District Collector, Adilabad District, respondent

No.1, to consider the representation dated 28.11.2016

submitted by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, 3 AAR, J W.P.No.35865 of 2018

preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of the order. It is needless to mention that the

District Collector will consider the representation of the

petitioners duly taking into account the judgment of this Court

in W.P.No.8506 of 2007, dated 19.11.2016, having regard to

the fact that the representation has been given on 28.11.2016

and received by the office of the District Collector on

30.11.2016, the respondent authorities shall verify the same

and if it is still pending and not passed necessary orders on the

same. Further, if the representation is not found, petitioners

shall be put on notice directing them to file a fresh

representation and after receipt of the representation stated to

have been filed by the petitioners, necessary orders shall be

passed thereon. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

                                         __________________________
                                          A. ABHISHEK REDDY, J
Date:15.03.2022

plv/KH
                          4                               AAR, J
                                           W.P.No.35865 of 2018

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

WRIT PETITION No.35865 of 2018

Date:15.03.2022

Plv/KH