Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Challa Durgakka @ Durgamma W/O Late vs The Special Collector La Srsp And Others

High Court Of Telangana|08 October, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No. 9086 of 2013 Date : 8-10-2014 Between :
Challa Durgakka @ Durgamma W/o late Chinna buchaiah @ Buchi Reddy R/o H No. 1-39, Jilleda village, Vemanapally mandal Adilabad dist … Petitioners and The Special Collector (LA) SRSP, SSP, JCRLIS and Pranahita Hyd and others … Respondents The Court made the following:
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No. 9086 of 2013 ORDER :-
Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 17.12.2011 for acquisition of land for the purpose of Pranahita Chevella project. Land to an extent of Ac. 12.28 guntas in Survey No. 94/18, Jilleda village, Vemanpally mandal, Adilabad district was also included in the said notification. On 15.3.2013 award was passed. In the award name of the third respondent was shown as owner of the above property and he was declared as person entitled to receive the compensation. This writ petition is instituted by the petitioner contending that petitioner is the actual owner of the said land and illegally revenue records were manipulated by the third respondent and got his name included in the revenue records and in the award passed by the land acquisition officer, his name is shown as beneficiary to receive compensation. Petitioner further contends that he has submitted representations dated 29.10.2012 and 13.3.2013 not to disburse the compensation and to refer the dispute to Civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. Alleging that her representations are not acted upon and on the contrary the compensation amount determined was proposed for disbursement, this writ petition is instituted.
2. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondent no.2/Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition). The stand of the second respondent is that in the revenue records, name of the third respondent is shown, therefore third respondent was declared as beneficiary to receive compensation to the extent of the land acquired for the purpose of Pranahita Chevella project. In fact at the stage of award enquiry, a notice dated 22.11.2012 was served on petitioner directing him to appear before the second respondent on 17.12.2012 at 11.00 AM and produce material in support of his claim over the subject land. The petitioner neither appeared before the second respondent nor produced any material in support of her claim that she is owner of the subject land. Since no rival claim is established, the third respondent was declared as person entitled to receive the compensation.
3. Third respondent filed counter affidavit along with vacate petition in WVMP No.2278 of 2013.
4. Learned counsel for third respondent submits that petitioner is not the owner of the subject land and an illegal claim was made with a malicious intention to knock out the compensation and in view of the interim stay granted by this Court, compensation amount is not paid and the same is withheld causing much hardship.
5. Though sufficient opportunity was afforded to the petitioner, she has not produced relevant material in support of her claim that she is owner of the subject land when the acquisition proceedings were going on. Therefore based on the revenue records, Land Acquisition Officer determined the compensation and third respondent was declared as person entitled to receive said compensation. Therefore I do not see any illegality or irregularity in the decision of the Land Acquisition Officer in declaring the third respondent as person entitled to receive the compensation. There are not merits in the writ petition warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of the writ petition does not bar the petitioner to work out her remedies available to her under law to establish her title over the subject property and seek consequential reliefs against third respondent.
Sequel to the same miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand dismissed.
P NAVEEN RAO,J DATE: 08-10-2014 TVK HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No. 9086 of 2013 Date : 8-10-2014
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Challa Durgakka @ Durgamma W/O Late vs The Special Collector La Srsp And Others

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
08 October, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao