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

Sangati Devamatha W/O Late Symon vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

High Court Of Telangana|12 November, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.32995 of 2014 Dated : 12.11.2014 Between:
Sangati Devamatha W/o.Late Symon, Aged about 68 yrs, R/o.D.No.6-26, Ambedkarnagar, Kesarapalli, Gannavaram Mandal, Krishna District & another .. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Secretary, Infrastructure & Investment Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad & another .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.32995 of 2014 ORDER :
The Airport Director, AAI, Vijayawada, has submitted a requisition to the Land Acquisition Officer to acquire an extent of Ac.465-00 cents of land in Buddavaram, Kesarapalli & Ajjampudi Villages of Gannavaram Mandal, for the purpose of up gradation and expansion of Vijayawada Airport. As per the said requisition an extent of Ac.133.02 cents in R.S.Nos.224, 225 and 241 and other survey numbers of Kesarapalli Village, in Gannavaram Mandal, were also proposed for acquisition.
2. A Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the ‘Act’) was issued on 11.11.2013, which includes the lands in Survey Nos.252, 252/17, 252/10A, new Survey Nos.252/1 and 252/8. Notice under Section 5(A) of the Act was issued calling for objections. As per the representation submitted by the petitioners on 28.12.2013 a notice was received by them on 24.12.2013, and the petitioners have expressed no objection for acquisition of their extent of share on the above Survey numbers i.e., 0-58 cents, subject to payment of proper compensation. They have also informed the Land Acquisition Officer that O.S.No.51 of 2013 is pending on the file of XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, seeking for partition. This writ petition is instituted contending that the respondent authorities have not considered the representation submitted by the petitioners for grant of compensation to an extent of Ac.0-58 cents in the above survey numbers and sought consequential direction to pay compensation as per the present market value.
3. Learned Government pleader produced written instructions dated 03.11.2014, by the Sub Collector (FAC) , Nuzvid. It would disclose that an enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act was conducted on 04.01.2014. The 2nd petitioner herein, has attended the enquiry in addition to submitting a written representation. The Government in memo dated 07.08.2014 has approved the report prepared under Section 5(A) of the Act and accordingly, the objections were considered and the Collector, Krishna District, passed orders on 16.08.2014.
4. The written instructions also disclose that in the orders passed under Section 5(A) of the Act, it is stated that the entitlement for appropriate compensation would be considered in accordance with Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 during the award enquiry. As evident from the note circulated to the Government Pleader, orders under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act, are yet to be passed. It is the categorical assurance of the District Collector, that the claim for payment of appropriate compensation will be considered during the award enquiry. However, as evident from the pleadings and the written note circulated to the Government Pleader, the grievance of the petitioner was already attended to. With reference to the entitlement of the petitioner, vis-à-vis the other persons who are claiming various extents of land in Survey Numbers mentioned in the writ petition, the petitioners have to independently work out their remedies. It is needless to observe that the petitioners shall be put on notice regarding conducting of award enquiry and their objections shall be taken due note of, before passing the award.
5. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO,J 12th November, 2014
Rds
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

Sangati Devamatha W/O Late Symon vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
12 November, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao