Telangana High Court
WP/27574/2005 of S.A. Salam S/o S. Suleman Khan Vs Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of on 26 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.27574 OF 2005 Dated: 26-12-2005 Between S.A. Salam, S/o. S. Suleman Khan, Occ: Business, R/o. 10/10614, Trunk Road, Kadapa and another. …PETITIONERS AND Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Kadapa, Kadapa District and others.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No.27574 OF 2005
Dated: 26-12-2005
Between
S.A. Salam, S/o. S. Suleman Khan,Occ: Business, R/o. 10/10614, TrunkRoad, Kadapa and another.
…PETITIONERS
AND
Commissioner, Municipal Corporation ofKadapa, Kadapa District and others.
…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:
Petitioners seek a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No.1and his staff dated 22.12.2005 in orally asking them to surrender their premises bearing OldDoor No.3/28 New No.3/54 situated at R.S. Road Trunk Road, 10/1061/1, 2, 3, 4 and10/1061/1062 situated at Trunk Road, Kadapa Town as illegal and arbitrary.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners of above saidpremises in Kadapa town and municipality. The Kadapa municipality has been recentlyupgraded as Municipal Corporation. In view of the traffic congestion and to have free flow oftraffic the Kadapa Municipal Corporation has decided to widen the roads, for which they have identified 26 roads in the entire kadapa municipal corporation. Learned counsel for thepetitioners further submits that the petitioners are not at all against the road-wideningprogramme of the respondents and they have no objection for the said programme if theirlands are acquired and if proper compensation is paid.
The only grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents without issuing any notices,without paying any compensation for their structures or the lands and without following dueprocess of law, are threatening to demolish the existing structures of the petitioners for thepurpose of road-widening.
The learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that the action of respondents withoutfollowing the due procedure prescribed under law and without paying any compensationeither by way of private negotiations or by way of initiating proceedings under the LandAcquisition Act, 1894 is utter violation of the principles of natural justice as well as Sections146 and 147 of the Municipal Corporation Act (for short ‘the Act’).
This Court disposed of number of writ petitions directing the respondents not to demolishthe houses of the private citizens without following due process of law.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to demolish the structures ortake away any portion of the properties of the petitioners and not to dispossess themwithout following due process of law under Sections 146 and 147 of the Act or privatenegotiations or initiating the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. No costs.
December 26, 2005
Note: Furnish C.C. of the order in three days.
(B/O)
DSK
______________
V. ESWARAIAH, J