HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13016 of 2011 Dated : 21.01.2014 Between:
Neerudi Narsing Rao, S/o late Parvathaiah and others .. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary and others .. Respondent This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.13016 of 2011 ORDER :
The petitioners are the residents of Maheswaram Village. They owned small extents of land which consist of residential houses and commercial outlets. The properties of the petitioners abut village road which passes from Bowrampet to Mallampet Village. The grievance of the petitioners is that bypassing the earlier scheme of Outer Ring Road Project, this road is proposed for utilisation as service road which would connect the Outer Ring Road. The petitioners apprehend that if such course is permitted, there is every possibility of the properties owned by them acquired for widening of the existing road and in such a case, great hardship would be caused to them.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that huge extent of land situated in the said village was already acquired for the purpose of Outer Ring Road Project and that if the remaining land is acquired, it would wipe out the existing village itself. She further submits that the Outer Ring Road project consists of main Outer Ring Road and the service roads on either side of the Outer Ring Road. Huge extent of land was acquired for the purpose of laying service roads and to great extent service roads are also laid and therefore, the respondents cannot deviate from the original plan and utilise the stretch of road in their village as part of the service road. This would require widening of the road which would affect their properties.
Respondent No.2 filed counter-affidavit clarifying the apprehension of the petitioners. It is categorically asserted in paras 6 and 9 that there is no proposal to widen the existing road and the existing road is only proposed for improvement and strengthening, for the purpose of utilising the same as the connecting service road. The relevant portion of paras 6 and 9 read as under :-
“6. Therefore, keeping in view of the above constraints and to minimise the damage to the lake, HMDA/HGCL proposes to improve and strengthen the existing R&B road to an extent of 1.23km in Sambipur village having a width of bout 7.00 m which is running parallel to ORR between Borampet village and Mallampet village. It is to inform that, there is no proposal to acquire additional land abutting to this existing road for improvement and strengthening the road.
9. ……..As an alternate, for connecting the service roads of ORR the existing R&B road in Sambipur Village road can be used as a connectivity between service road of ORR. There is no other proposal to widen the existing road by acquiring additional land adjacent to the said road as stated by the petitioner.”
In view of the said assertion in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, deposed by Sri D.Bhaskar, Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), the apprehension of the petitioners that there would be widening of the road resulting in acquiring their properties, no more subsists and their grievance stood answered by the respondent-authorities. Except the apprehension that on account of proposal for utilisation of this stretch of the road in the above mentioned village as service road their properties are going to be acquired, no other grievance is agitated by the petitioners and in view of the categorical statement made in the counter-affidavit, it is not necessary to adjudicate their grievance.
Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of as no further orders are required. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date: 21.01.2014 ssp