Telangana High Court
WP/27593/2005 of Smt.Niaz Fatima, Vs The Municipal Corporation of Warangal, on 26 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.27593 OF 2005 Dt.26.12.2005 Between: Niaz Fatima … Petitioner And The Municipal Corporation of Warangal, Warangal, rep. by its Commissioner and Another. … Respondents ORDER: The petitioner questions the impugned notice in File
W.P.NO.27593 OF 2005
Dt.26.12.2005
Between:
Niaz Fatima … Petitioner
And
The Municipal Corporation of Warangal,Warangal, rep. by its Commissioner andAnother. … Respondents
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 questions the impugned notice in FileNo.81/64/TP/2005 dated 6.12.2005 issued by the first respondentintending to acquire the house site of the petitioner bearing MunicipalNo.6-6-45 to an extent of 96.65 sq.yards out of an extent of 225sq.yards situated at T.P.T, Hanamkonda, Warangal District, withoutobtaining the consent and without adopting the due process of law asillegal and arbitrary.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned StandingCounsel on behalf of the respondents.
It is stated that the petitioner is the owner of the house bearingMunicipal No.6-6-45 admeasuring 225 sq.yards situated at T.P.T,Hanamkonda, Warangal District and the first respondent passed a resolution on 6.12.2005 informing the general public thatwhomsoever the land/house/ property is coming into the roadwidening they will be given house site at the appropriate place andthe equal value of the said property which is sought to be acquired forroad widening purpose will be given by the municipality.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of theopinion that there cannot be any objection for the petitioner if propercompensation is paid. The grievance of the petitioner is that withoutpaying any compensation and without following the due process oflaw under Sections 146 and 147 of the Municipal Corporation Act, therespondents are threatening to demolish the existing structure of thepetitioner. Therefore, the respondents are directed not to demolishany structure or taking away any portion of the property of thepetitioner without following the procedure prescribed under Sections146 and 147 of the said Act or by private negotiations or initiating theproceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
________________
(V.ESWARAIAH, J.)
26.12.2005
kpr