Telangana High Court
WP/28900/2009 of Namburu Lokeswara Gupta, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its on 31 December 2009
MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28900 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of premises bearing R.S.No.4/1, Municipal Ward No.1, Kabela Road, Vijayawada. His grievance is that the respondents are trying to widen the existing road by utilizing portion of the land
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYWRIT PETITION No.28900 of 2009
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner claims to be the owner of premises bearing R.S.No.4/1,Municipal Ward No.1, Kabela Road, Vijayawada. His grievance is that therespondents are trying to widen the existing road by utilizing portion of theland owned by him. It is stated that the markings were made to the extent ofthe affected portion and no proceedings were initiated under the LandAcquisition Act.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned StandingCounsel for the respondents.
Whenever it becomes necessary for the Municipal Corporation or anyother local authority to widen the road, it is mandatory that the proceedingsunder the Land Acquisition Act are initiated for acquiring the effective portionor alternative is to undertake negotiations. Without taking recourse to any ofthese measures, the property of a private individual cannot be utilized forlaying of a road or widening the existing one.
On behalf of the respondents, it is stated that only proposals areinitiated and ultimately when the work is to be undertaken, the procedureprescribed under law would be followed.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that any part of theproperty owned by the petitioner shall not be utilized for widening of the road,unless it is acquired in accordance with law. There shall be no order as tocosts.
___________
31-12-2009
Note:Issue C.C. in three days (B/o) Prv