Telangana High Court
WA/2335/2005 of M. Bhaskar Reddy, Vs The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, on 30 December 2005
SRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI WRIT APPEAL No. 2335 of 2005 29-11-2005 Between: M.Bhaskar Reddy. ..... APPELLANT AND The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh & Another. .....RESPONDENTS THE
THE HON’BLE SRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI
WRIT APPEAL No. 2335 of 2005
29-11-2005
Between:
M.Bhaskar Reddy.
AND
..... APPELLANT
The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Government of Andhra Pradesh &Another.
.....RESPONDENTS
THE HON’BLE SRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI
WRIT APPEAL No. 2335 of 2005
JUDGMENT:(Per Hon’ble Sri Bilal Nazki, J)
This appeal has been filed against an order passed by thelearned Single Judge in writ petition No.24641 of 2005.
Page 1 of 2
The appellant/petitioner claimed that his family owned an extentof land in Survey Nos.220 and 221, measuring about 20 Acres atKapra Village of Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The landwas acquired by the Nuclear Fuel Complex (for short ‘NFC’) aboutfour Decades ago and the appellant/petitioner had receivedcompensation for the land. Even a reference was made to the CivilCourt under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and thecompensation was enhanced and it was also received by theappellant/petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that oneSmt.M.Shyamala and sons occupied a part of the land belonging toNFC, which was not utilized by NFC, therefore, this land should berestored to the petitioner.
It is a settled law, as found by the learned Single Judge, thatonce the land was acquired by the State, even if it was not utilized bythe State, the erstwhile owner has no right over the said property. Theland belongs to NFC, as it has been acquired by them and thepetitioner has received the compensation for the land. If the landbelonging to NFC has been encroached upon by any one else, thatis for NFC to take appropriate steps to get back the land. In any case,the appellant/petitioner has no claim over the land.
In this view of the matter, we do not find any ground to interferein the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Appeal isaccordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
__________________
(G.S.SINGHVI, HCJ)
29[th] November 2005
________________ (BILAL NAZKI, J)
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…