Telangana High Court
WP/7992/2007 of Gowrishankar Sanghi S/o. Sham Sunderlal Sanghi Vs The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, on 29 December 2009
SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7992 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of premises bearing Nos.21-2-443 and 21-2-444 of Gulzar House, Hyderabad. His grievance is that the respondents have demarcated part of the area for the purpose of widening the road.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
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:
WRIT PETITION No.7992 of 2007
The petitioner claims to be the owner of premises bearingNos.21-2-443 and 21-2-444 of Gulzar House, Hyderabad. Hisgrievance is that the respondents have demarcated part of thearea for the purpose of widening the road. The petitionercomplains that no proceedings were initiated either under the LandAcquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) or the HyderabadMunicipal Corporation Act, 1955 and that attempts are being madeto takeover the property without paying the compensation.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel for the first respondent.
The premises owned by the petitioner abut a road, which isidentified for widening. He is under the impression that therespondents have not initiated any proceedings under the relevantprovisions of law for acquiring the affected property.
The learned Standing Counsel has placed before this Court,copies of notifications published under Sections 4(1) and 6 of theAct on 02.09.2008 and 22.09.2008 respectively. Eleven itemswere proposed for acquisition and the property owned by thepetitioner is shown at item No.9. The petitioner has to put forwardhis objections in the said proceedings.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to thepetitioner to participate in the proceedings initiated under the Act vis-à-vis the property and pursue his remedies. There shall be noorder as to costs.
REDDY,J
Dt:29.12.2009
kdl
_____________________
L.NARASIMHA