Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 350 (TS)

Darbar Prakash v. State of Telangana

2019-09-23

CHALLA KODANDA RAM

body2019
ORDER : 1. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to non-payment of compensation for the land over an extent of Ac.0-06 guntas in Survey No.69 of Mamidgi Village, Nyalkal Mandal, Sangareddy District, which was acquired for the purpose of road widening; and also with regard to non-providing of employment to one of the family members of the petitioner. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Sri Rajashekar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, has placed on record the written instructions received from the District Panchayat Raj Engineer, PIU, Sangareddy, vide letter No.AEE/226/2019 dated 18.09.2019. 4. Likewise, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has placed on record the written instructions received from Revenue Divisional Officer, Zaheerabad, dated 19.09.2019. 5. It is not necessary to reproduce the lengthy written instructions made available by the District Panchayat Raj Engineer. The short instructions provided by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Zaheerabad, read as under: “It is to submit that, the land in Sy.No.69, to an extent of Ac.0.06 gts, situated at Rajola village of Nyalkal Mandal of Sangareddy District is recorded as Mafi Inam as per the Khasra Pahani for the year 1954-55 and subsequent records till pahani for the year 1989-90 and in occupant column also recorded as Mafi Inam and in the year 2011-12 the name of the Sri Darbar Prakash S/o Narsaiah is recorded as pattadar, in respect of land in Sy.No.69, to an extent of Ac.0.06 gts, situated at Rajola village of Nyalkal Mandal. Further, submit that, the Deputy Executive Engineer, PR sub- Division Sangareddy, vide Lr, No.DB/Land Acquisition/2017, Dt.07.12.2017, stated that the road formed from basanthpur to rajola MP, Nyalkal Zaheerabad constituency has been administrative sanctioned under TFC-RIAD grant for upgradation up to BT standard in the year 2009 with estimation cost of Rs.180.00 lakhs. Further, submit that, the District Panchayat Raj Engineer PIU Division Sangareddy, has submitted land acquisition proposals I respect of land in Sy.No.69, to an extent of Ac.0.06 gts, situated Rajola Village of Nyalkal Mandal vide his office Lr.No.TI/226/2017, Dt.20.09.2018, accordingly, as per the land acquisition proposals received from the District Panchayath Raj Engineer PIU Division Sangareddy, the Preliminary Notification proposals submitted to the District Collector, Sangareddy by this office vide Lr.No.B/869/2019, Dt.07.06.2019, for its approval. The District Collector, Sangareddy has approved the Preliminary Notification and submitted to the Commissioner I & PRDepartment Samachar Bhavan, A.C. guards, masab Tank, T.S. Hyderabad, vide Lr. No.G1/22/2016, Dated, 13.08.2019 for publication in the news paper. After receiving the same from Commissioner I & PR Department, process will be initiated fro payment of compensation. This is submitted with a request to apprise the fact before the Hon’ble High Court for State of Telangana Hyderabad.” 6. From the above narration of facts set out by the Revenue Divisional Officer, which are not in conflict with the instructions provided by the District Panchayat Raj Engineer, it is clear that the land was affected in the road widening and the petitioner was not paid any compensation. 7. Inasmuch as the Preliminary Notification was approved vide letter No.G1/22/2016 dated 13.08.2019, the entire exercise of land acquisition proposed to be initiated shall be completed within a period of four (4) months, and compensation be paid to the petitioner as per the Award to be made with out fail. 8. With respect to the claim of the petitioner that one of the family members is entitled to Government employment as per the scheme of the Government to provide employment to one of the family members of land oustees, the writ petition lacks necessary particulars to adjudicate the said issue. Furthermore, as on date, there being no reference with respect to the provisions or schemes under which such a claim for employment is to be entertained, the issue is left open to the petitioner to agitate the same by placing appropriate material before this Court. 9. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.