Telangana High Court
WP/18915/2002 of Md.Yousuf Vs Deputy Collector cum Mandal Revenue Officer, on 27 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18915 of 2002 Between: 1 Md.Yousuf S/o Late Raj Mohammed R/o Nanak Ram Guda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO : 18915 of 2002
Between:
1 Md.Yousuf S/o Late Raj Mohammed
R/o Nanak Ram Guda Sherilingampally Mandal, R.R.District.
2 Md.Shareef S/o Late Raj Mohammed
R/o Nanak Ram Guda Sherilingampally Mandal, R.R.District.
AND
..... PETITIONERS
1 Deputy Collector cum Mandal Revenue Officer, Sherilingampally Mandal,Ranga Reddy District.
2 District Collector,Ranga Reddy District Lakidi-ka- pool,Hyderabad.
3 Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., (APIC LTD),Basheerbagh,Hyderabad,Rep.by its Managing Director. Director.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue a writ of Mandamus to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one inthe nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Notices Nos. B/1970/2000-8dt.17-4-2002 subsequent notice B/1979/2000,dt.5-9-2002,issued by the 1strespondent, as illegal violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by theConstitution of India, null and void and violation of provisions of land acquisition act and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to disposes thepetitioner from their lands admeasuring Ac.4.13 guntas comprised in Sy.No.115/32,situated at Nankramguda village, Serilingampally Mandal,Ranga ReddyDistrict.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.H.SIDDAIAH
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: MR.R.SUBBA RAO
The Court made the following :
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:
This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the impugned notices dated 17-4-2002 and 5-9-2002 issued by the 1[st] respondent are arbitrary and illegal and for aconsequential direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners fromtheir respective lands.
When the matter is taken up for consideration, it has been represented by thelearned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for therespondents that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the ratiolaid down by a Full Bench Judgment of Seven learned Judges of this court in L.A.O-cum-R.D.O., Chevella Division, Domalaguda, Hyderabad v. M.Pandu and followingthe principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment, a learned Single Judge of thisCourt has also disposed of W.P.No.11759 of 2002 and batch by an order dated 20[th]September 2004 with the following directions.
“ In view of the settled legal position, all the writ petitions are disposedof directing respondents 1 and 2, and the Government of AndhraPradesh to pay the compensation to all the petitioners equivalent to fullmarket value of the land and other benefits on par with full owners ofthe land. It is brought to the notice of this Court by Sri Ch.Siddaiah,learned counsel for the petitioners in some of the writ petitions, that theGovernment had acquired the land of the owners sometime last year. Ifthat be so, the Government may also take into consideration thecompensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer in those acquisitionproceedings. Respondents shall take appropriate action for payment ofmarket value to the petitioners, within a period of four months from thedate of receipt of a copy of this Order. The interim orders passed shallstand vacated. It shall be open to the Government to deal with theamount deposited by the APIIC appropriately. No costs.”
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the directions issued by thisCourt in W.P.11759 of 2002 and batch dated 20-09-2004.
___________
27-12-2004
rkk
To
1 Deputy Collector cum Mandal Revenue Officer, Sherilingampally Mandal,Ranga Reddy District.
2 District Collector,Ranga Reddy District Lakidi-ka- pool,Hyderabad.
Conclusion
3 Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd.,(APIC LTD),Basheerbagh,Hyderabad,Rep.by its Managing Director.
4 Two CD copies.