Thodi Laxma Reddy vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh,
2023 Latest Caselaw 3367 Tel

         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

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.

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.

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