Telangana High Court
WP/23245/2002 of Pallamreddy Koteswara Reddy Vs Governmnet of Andhra Pradesh, on 26 December 2008
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23245 of 2002 Between: Pallamreddy Koteswara Reddy S/o. Late Venkataswamy Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYWRIT PETITION NO : 23245 of 2002
Between:
Pallamreddy Koteswara Reddy S/o. Late Venkataswamy Reddy R/o. Ramakuru Village, Rapur Mandal, Nellore District.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Governmnet of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, IrrigationDepartment, Secretariat Buildings, at Hyderabad.
2 The Special Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nellore, Nellore District.
3 The Chief Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project Srikalasasti, Chittoor District.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will bepleased to to issue an appropriate writ order or direction, preferably one in thenature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondnets in notconsidering the representation of the petitioner dated29-9-2002 to acquire thelands covered Survey Nos. 3/2, 4/4 and 5/4 to an extent of Ac. 6-17 centsAC.5-20 cents and Ac. 0.40 cents repectively of penubarthy GopasamudramVillage, Rapur mandal, Nellore District which have become inaccessible anduncultivable on accounts of denlal of irrigation facilities consequent upon theacquisition of entire village inclding the lands surrounding the above saidlands for the purpose of foreshore submersion of Kandaleru Reservoir toTelugu Ganga Project as arbitrary as illegal, discriminatory contrary to lawand violate of Art 300-A and 21 of the constitution of India, and consequentlydirectthe respondnets herein to acquire the said lands of the petitioner andpay compensation to the petitioner forthwith; and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA
DEV.
The Court made the following :
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
W.P.No.23245 of 2002
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 is the owner of Ac.11-77 cents of land in SurveyNos.3/2,4/4 and 5/4 of Penubarthy Gopasamudram village, Rapur Mandal ofNellore District. The entire village of Penubarthy which is in immediateneighbourhood of Kandaleru was acquired for the purpose of expansion ofKandeleru Reservoir under Telugu Ganga Project. The petitioner states thathis lands became inaccessible on account of construction of reservoir and hisrepresentation made on 29.9.2002 for acquisition of lands is not being actedupon. The petitioner contends that he stands on the same footing as thepetitioners in W.P.15874 of 1992 and similar treatment is not accorded to him.
The third respondent filed a counter affidavit. It is stated that the FullReservoir Level (FRL) of Kandaleru is +85.00M contour level and the landsof the petitioner are below that level. They admit that the lands adjacent to thelands of the petitioner were submerged. The respondent states that a newapproach has been laid by the Government to access the lands of thepetitioner. They admit that the lands, which are the subject matter ofW.P.No.15874 of 1992 were acquired. However, they seek to differentiate thelands of the petitioner.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned GovernmentPleader for Irrigation.
The petitioner has faced a typical situation on account of the constructionof a big reservoir under Telugu Ganga Project. In his immediateneighourhood, the entire village was acquired. The lands of the petitioner aresaid to have assumed the shape of almost an Inland. Owners of part of suchlands have approached this court by filing W.P.No.15874 of 1992. This courtdirected the Chief Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, -the third respondent
Conclusion
herein to examine the matter. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that thedirection was complied with and that the lands of the petitioners therein havesince been acquired. If the petitioner stands on the same footing, there is noreason why he is not extended the same benefit. The representation made bythe petitioner on 29-9-2002 in this regard deserves close examination andimmediate action.
Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed toexamine the representation dated 29.9.2002 submitted by the petitioner withreference to location and other factors in relation to the lands that are thesubject matter in W.P.No.15874 of 1992 and take necessary steps within aperiod of three months from the date of this order. There shall be no order asto costs.
____________________
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J
26.12.2008Stp
To1.2CCs to2.2CD copies
Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR}
// TRUE COPY //
..... REGISTRARSECTION OFFICER