Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 269 (TS)

Seetha Sulochana v. State of Telangana

2021-08-13

A.ABHISHEK REDDY

body2021
ORDER : A. Abhishek Reddy, J. 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the Notice No. D4/1382/2019, dated 06.04.2020, issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gajwel Division, Siddipet District, respondent No.2 herein, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, to set aside the same by directing the respondents to forbear from acquiring any land of the petitioner in Damarakunta Village, Markuk Mandal, Siddipet District. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner, possessor and pattadar of agricultural land, admeasuring Acs. 4.29 guntas in Survey No. 98, and Acs. 7.38 guntas in Survey No. 99, situated in Damarkunta Village, Markuk Mandal, Siddipet District, having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 12.03.2001 for a valuable consideration. Pattadar pass book and title deed were also issued in her favour. As on the date, the subject land has 1600 mango trees, 700 red sandal wood trees, 800 teak trees, 100 guava trees and various other vegetable crops. While so, the respondent No. 2 has issued the impugned notice dated 06.04.2020 stating that the land belong to the petitioner to an extent of Ac. 0.14 guntas in Survey No. 98 and Ac. 0.11 guntas in Survey No. 99 has been notified to be acquired for construction of canal under Kondapochamma Reservoir of Kaleswaram Project at Thurkapally. By the said notice, the petitioner was directed to approach the Tahsildar, Markuk Mandai, respondent No. 3 herein, on 07.05.2020, and file her objections along with valid documents, and receive the compensation. Pursuant to the said notice, the petitioner has submitted her objections/letters to the Tahsildar, Markuk Mandal, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gajwel Mandal, Siddipet District, and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on 07.05.2020, 20.05.2020 and 17.06.2020 respectively. But, there was no response from them. In the objections dated 20.05.2020 and 17.06.2020, the petitioner has categorically pointed out that a large extent of Government land is available on the western and northern sides of her land, and if the canal alignment is taken through the said Government land, a large saving in land acquisition compensation can be made apart from saving valuable land, mango, guava, teak garden, and that the re-alignment of canal in such circumstances would only be marginal, and no prejudice would be caused to anybody. 3. 3. It is stated that in the Notification dated 19.07.2019, published in 'Andhra Prabha' Telugu Daily News Paper, it was notified that an extent of Ac. 0.14 guntas in Survey No. 98 and Ac. 0.14 guntas in Survey No. 99 belonging to the petitioner will be acquired. But, however, in the Notification dated 02.03.2020, published in 'Manam' Telugu Daily News Paper, it was mentioned that Ac. 0.14 guntas in Survey No. 98 and Ac. 0.11 guntas in Survey No. 99 would be acquired. 4. It is further stated that the respondent No. 2 has high handedly issued the Notice dated 30.06.2020 through whatsApp on 14.07.2020 directing the petitioner to collect the cheque for compensation amount within seven days from the date of receipt of the said notice or otherwise the same will be deposited with the appropriate authority and the said land will be acquired. On that, she immediately went to the office of the respondent No. 2, to submit a reply to the said notice, but the officials have refused to receive her reply. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 5. Respondent No. 2 - the Authorised Officer and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gajwel, has filed a counter affidavit stating that the Preliminary Notification under Section 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'the Act') was published in 'Andhra Prabha' and 'Times of India', Daily News Papers, on 19.09.2019 notifying Acs. 1.20 guntas of land in Survey Nos. 43,98 and 99 of Damarakunta Village, Markook Mandal, Siddipet District. Insofar as Survey No. 98 is concerned, Ac. 0.14 guntas of patta land belonging to the petitioner was notified and insofar as Survey No. 99 is concerned, Acs. 0.14 guntas was notified in the name of seven persons jointly based on the enjoyment of the land and Revenue Records. Subsequently, Grama Sabha was conducted under Section 11(2) of the Act on 14.02.2020. But, either during the Grama Sabha or within 60 days from the date of Preliminary Notification, no objections have been received from the petitioner or by any of her representative. Subsequently, Grama Sabha was conducted under Section 11(2) of the Act on 14.02.2020. But, either during the Grama Sabha or within 60 days from the date of Preliminary Notification, no objections have been received from the petitioner or by any of her representative. The declaration under Section 19(1) of the Act was published in 'Manam' and 'The Hans India', Daily News Papers, on 02.03.2020 and the same was also published in the District Gazette on 25.02.2020, duly uploading the same in the District Website, for an extent of Ac. 1.17 guntas as against Ac. 1.20 guntas notified in the Preliminary Notification, as Ac. 0.03 guntas of land in Survey No. 43 was resumed being assigned land. In the said declaration, Ac. 0.14 guntas of patta land belonging to the petitioner in Survey No. 98 was declared for acquisition, and in Survey No. 99 only Ac. 0.11 guntas was declared for acquisition in the name of the petitioner, as the remaining extent of Ac. 0.03 guntas was found to be in possession of one Smt. Guduru Padma and patta was also issued on her name. Therefore, there is variation of Ac. 0.03 guntas in the preliminary notification and the final declaration in respect of the land of the petitioner. After publication of declaration, the impugned Award enquiry notices were issued to the concerned land losers, including the petitioner herein. Accordingly, an Award enquiry was conducted and during the said enquiry, the petitioner has attended the enquiry and filed a petition for change of alignment of the proposed canal. But, the objections raised in the petition were not attracted the provisions of the Act, and therefore, the objection petition was not considered. Thereafter, the Draft Award has been pronounced on 29.06.2020. Pursuant to the Award proceedings, notices dated 30.06.2020 have been issued to the concerned land losers including the petitioner herein. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the learned Additional Advocate General. Perused the material available on record. 7. A perusal of the record discloses that the petitioner has mainly challenged the acquisition of the subject lands on the grounds that the procedure contemplated under the Act has not been followed; that there is a variation with regard to the land that is sought to be acquired as per the notification issued under Section 11 vis-à-vis. 7. A perusal of the record discloses that the petitioner has mainly challenged the acquisition of the subject lands on the grounds that the procedure contemplated under the Act has not been followed; that there is a variation with regard to the land that is sought to be acquired as per the notification issued under Section 11 vis-à-vis. Section 19 of the Act; that the alignment of the Canal, for which purpose the land is sought to be acquired, can be changed in view of the availability of the Government land towards western and northern sides of the subject land. 8. In order to appreciate the various contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is apposite to refer to the relevant provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Section 11 of the Act reads thus:- "11. Publication of preliminary notification and power of officers thereupon. - (1) Whenever, it appears to the appropriate Government that land in any area is required or likely to be required for any public purpose, a notification (hereinafter referred to as preliminary notification) to that effect along with details of the land to be acquired in rural and urban areas shall be published in the following manner, namely:- (a) in the Official Gazette; (b) in two daily newspapers circulating in the locality of such area of which one shall be in the regional language; (c) in the local language in the Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be and in the offices of the District Collector, the Sub-divisional Magistrate and the Tehsil; (d) uploaded on the website of the appropriate Government; (e) in the affected areas, in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) Immediately after issuance of the notification under sub-section (1), the concerned Gram Sabha or Sabhas at the village level, municipalities in case of municipal areas and the Autonomous Councils in case of the areas referred to in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution, shall be informed of the contents of the notification issued under the said subsection in all cases of land acquisition at a meeting called especially for this purpose. (3) The notification issued under sub-section (1) shall also contain a statement on the nature of the public purpose involved, reasons necessitating the displacement of affected persons, summary of the Social Impact Assessment Report and particulars of the Administrator appointed for the purposes of rehabilitation and resettlement under Section 43. (4) No person shall make any transaction or cause any transaction of land specified in the preliminary notification or create any encumbrances on such land from the date of publication of such notification till such time as the proceedings under this Chapter are completed: Provided that the Collector may, on the application made by the owner of the land so notified, exempt in special circumstances to be recorded in writing, such owner from the operation of this sub-section: Provided further that any loss or injury suffered by any person due to his willful violation of this provision shall not be made up by the Collector. (5) After issuance of notice under sub-section (1), the Collector shall, before the issue of a declaration under Section 19, undertake and complete the exercise of updating of land records as prescribed within a period of two months." 9. Section 15 of the Act, which deals with the hearing of the objections, reads thus:- "15. Hearing of objections:-(1) Any person interested in any land which has been notified under Section (1) of Section 11, as being required or likely to be required for a public purpose, may within sixty days from the date of the publication of the preliminary notification, object to - (a) the area and suitability of land proposed to be acquired; (b) justification offered for public purpose; (c) the findings of the Social Impact Assessment report. (2) Every objection under sub-section (1) shall be made to the Collector in writing, and the Collector shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard in person or by any person authorized by him in this behalf or by an Advocate and shall, after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub-section (1) of Section 11, or make a different reports in respect of different parcels of such land, to the appropriate Government, containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the proceedings held by him along with a separate report giving therein the approximate cost of land acquisition, particulars as to the number of affected families likely to be resettled, for the decision of that Government. (3) The decision of the appropriate Government on the objections made under sub-section (2) shall be final." 10. Section 19 of the Act reads thus:- "19. Publication of declaration and summary of Rehabilitation and Resettlement. - (1) When the appropriate Government is satisfied, after considering the report, if any, made under sub-section (2) of Section 15, that any particular land is needed for a public purpose, a declaration shall be made to that effect, along with a declaration of an area identified as the "resettlement area" for the purposes of rehabilitation and resettlement of the affected families, under the hand and seal of a Secretary to such Government or of any other officer duly authorised to certify its orders and different declarations may be made from time to time in respect of different parcels of any land covered by the same preliminary notification irrespective of whether one report or different reports has or have been made (wherever required). (2) The Collector shall publish a summary of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme along with draft declaration referred to in subsection (1): Provided that no declaration under this sub-section shall be made unless the summary of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme is published along with such declaration: Provided further that no declaration under this sub-section shall be made unless the Requiring Body deposits an amount, in full or part, as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government toward the cost of acquisition of the land: Provided also that the Requiring Body shall deposit the amount promptly so as to enable the appropriate Government to publish the declaration within a period of twelve months from the date of the publication of preliminary notification under Section 11. (3) In projects where land is acquired in stages, the application for acquisition itself can specify different stages for the rehabilitation and resettlement, and all declarations shall be made according to the stages so specified. (4) Every declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall be published in the following manner, namely:- (a) in the Official Gazette; (b) in two daily newspapers being circulated in the locality, of such area of which one shall be in the regional language; (c) in the local language in the Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, and in the offices of the District Collector, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Tehsil; (d) uploaded on the website of the appropriate Government; (e) in the affected areas, in such manner as may be prescribed. (5) Every declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall indicate,- (a) the district or other territorial division in which the land is situated; (b) the purpose for which it is needed, its approximate area; and (c) where a plan shall have been made for the land, the place at which such plan may be inspected without any cost. (6) The declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall be conclusive evidence that the land is required for a public purpose and, after making such declaration, the appropriate Government may acquire the land in such manner as specified under this Act. (6) The declaration referred to in sub-section (1) shall be conclusive evidence that the land is required for a public purpose and, after making such declaration, the appropriate Government may acquire the land in such manner as specified under this Act. (7) Where no declaration is made under sub-section (1) within twelve months from the date of preliminary notification, then such notification shall be deemed to have been rescinded: Provided that in computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall be excluded: Provided further that the appropriate Government shall have the power to extend the period of twelve months, if in its opinion circumstances exist justifying the same: Provided also that any such decision to extend the period shall be recorded in writing and the same shall be notified and be uploaded on the website of the authority concerned." 11. Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that no notice was issued by the official respondents, in connection with the acquisition of the subject land, the documents filed along with the counter of the respondent No. 2 disclose that preliminary notification issued under Section 11 of the Act was duly published in 'Andhra Prabha' and 'Times of India', Daily News Papers, on 19.09.2019 notifying Acs. 1.20 guntas of land in Survey Nos. 43, 98 and 99 of Damarakunta Village, Markook Mandal, Siddipet District. Thereupon, Grama Sabha was conducted under Section 11(2) of the Act on 14.02.2020. But, however, the petitioner has not participated either during the Grama Sabha proceedings or any objections were filed on her behalf within 60 days from the date of publication of preliminary notification. Subsequently, the declaration under Section 19(1) of the Act was also published on 02.03.2020 in two daily newspapers i.e. "Manam" and "The Hans India" and the same was also published in the District Gazette No. 120/2020 on 25.02.2020 for an extent of Ac. 1.17 guntas as against Ac. 1.20 guntas notified in the preliminary notification since Ac. 0.03 guntas of land in Sy. No. 43 was resumed being assigned land. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the officials concerned have substantially complied with the mandatory requirements contemplated under Sections 11 and 19 of the Act. 1.17 guntas as against Ac. 1.20 guntas notified in the preliminary notification since Ac. 0.03 guntas of land in Sy. No. 43 was resumed being assigned land. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the officials concerned have substantially complied with the mandatory requirements contemplated under Sections 11 and 19 of the Act. Admittedly, the petitioner has not filed any objection after issuance of the Notification under Section 11 of the Act, and therefore, the question of dealing with the objections under Section 15 of the Act does not arise. 12. With regard to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is variation of Ac. 0.03 guntas of land with regard to the acquisition of the proposed land as per the notification issued under Section 11 vis-a-vis. Section 19 of the Act, it is the specific case of the learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of learned Additional Advocate General, that although in the preliminary notification, Ac. 0.14 guntas of land of the petitioner in Survey No. 99 was sought to be acquired, yet only Ac. 0.11 guntas of land in Survey No. 99 was declared for acquisition, as the remaining extent of Ac. 0.03 guntas was found to be in possession of Smt. Guduru Padma and patta was also issued on her name. Therefore, there is variation of Ac. 0.03 guntas in the preliminary notification and the final declaration in respect of the land of the petitioner. Even the declaration under Section 19(1) of the Act was also published in the District Gazette on 25.02.2020. Only thereafter, the impugned award enquiry notice came to be issued to the petitioner. Moreover, according to the respondents, subsequent to the impugned notice, the petitioner had participated in the Award enquiry on 07.05.2020 and requested for change of alignment of the Canal. It is also asserted by the learned Special Government Pleader that the draft Award to an extent of Ac. 1.17 guntas, including the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac. 0.14 guntas in Sy. No. 98 and to an extent of Ac. 0.11 guntas in Sy. No. 99 was prepared on 15.06.2020 and submitted for approval to the District Collector, Siddipet, who in turn, approved the same vide proceedings No. G2/2409/2019, dated 29.06.2020 and accordingly, the Award has also been passed on 29.06.2020. 0.14 guntas in Sy. No. 98 and to an extent of Ac. 0.11 guntas in Sy. No. 99 was prepared on 15.06.2020 and submitted for approval to the District Collector, Siddipet, who in turn, approved the same vide proceedings No. G2/2409/2019, dated 29.06.2020 and accordingly, the Award has also been passed on 29.06.2020. Necessary notices were issued to the land losers, including the petitioner, through RPAD with a request to receive the compensation amount within seven days apart from affixing the notices at the office of the Gram Panchayat. The learned Special Government Pleader has submitted that as the petitioner did not turn up even after receipt of the notice, dated 30.06.2020, the matter has been referred to the competent authority under Section 64 of the Act. In support of their case, the respondents have filed the copies of notifications issued under Sections 11 & 19, the award enquiry notice, dated 06.04.2020, the notice, dated 19.09.2019 issued by the respondent No. 2 to the Panchayat Secretary, Damarakunta Village, Markur Mandal and also the compliance of the above notice, by the Panchayat Secretary. Thus, although the respondents have placed relevant material in order to establish that the procedure contemplated under the Act has been scrupulously followed, for the reasons best known to the petitioner, she did not choose to rebut the said documents and the facts submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader, by filing any reply affidavit or submitting any contra evidence. Therefore, this Court is left with no other option except to accept the various submissions made by the learned Special Government Pleader to be true. 13. Insofar as the other contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to the change of alignment of the Canal is concerned, except placing a sketch prepared by the petitioner herself, nothing has been placed on record to show that any other alternate Government land is available besides the land of the petitioner or that the alignment was changed at the behest of some interested party. Even if the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is taken to be true, a perusal of the sketch filed by the petitioner shows that the Canal, which was originally supposed to pass through Survey Nos. 98 and 99 is crisscrossing through the fields, whereas the alignment of the canal now proposed has only one curve. Even if the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is taken to be true, a perusal of the sketch filed by the petitioner shows that the Canal, which was originally supposed to pass through Survey Nos. 98 and 99 is crisscrossing through the fields, whereas the alignment of the canal now proposed has only one curve. This Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a writ petition cannot go into technical aspects with regard to the alignment of the canal, more particularly, in the absence of any material proof to substantiate the contention of the petitioner with regard to change of the alignment of Canal or whether the alignment now sought is correct or not. This Court, on number of occasions, has held that insofar as technical aspects are concerned, it is appropriate to leave it to the decision of the technical experts alone and it is not for the Courts to adjudicate upon the decision of the experts or propose some other alternate route or design. 14. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while contending that the respondents have not scrupulously followed the provisions of the Act, has relied on a decision of the Apex Court reported in J & K Housing Board v. Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Kaul, (2011) 10 SCC 714 . There is no quarrel with regard to the proposition laid down by the Apex Court in the said decision. However, with due respect to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said decision is not at all applicable to the facts of the present case. For, the above decision, relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is in a context where the authorities have not followed the mandatory procedure provided in Section 4(1) (a),(b) and (c) of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990. But, in the present case, the facts are entirely different. The respondents, apart from filing counter, have also placed on record the material which would clearly establish that they have scrupulously followed the mandatory procedure contemplated under the Act. Once it is established that the respondents have followed the procedure contemplated under the Act, this Court does not see any merit in any of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Once it is established that the respondents have followed the procedure contemplated under the Act, this Court does not see any merit in any of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Even for the sake of arguments, even if there are any minor lapses in the procedure for acquiring the land, the same have to be ignored taking into account the importance of the project involved. But, in the present case, no such lapse has been established. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition. 15. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 16. Miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.