Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 759 (TS)

S. Ram Reddy v. Aravind Kumar IAS

2025-06-09

C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

body2025
ORDER : C.V.BHASKAR REDDY This Contempt Case is filed alleging non-compliance of the interim order, dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1836 of 2020, wherein this Court directed the respondent No.2 to register the Plot No.181 admeasuring 666.67 sq.yards in favour of the petitioner as per the allotment made on 31.10.2016 duly relaxing the conditions for the registration as applicable under the Scheme within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and to file status report on the registration of the said plot by 16.03.2023. 2. It is stated that land to an extent of Ac.99.13 gts in Sy.Nos.500 & 501 situated at Uppal Bhagayat Village, was acquired for Musi River Conservation & River Front Development after following the procedure under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In lieu of compensation, the land-losers requested for allotment of alternative developed land of 1000 sq.yards as promised vide Proceedings No.LA/HUDA/363/05 dated 20.04.2007. On the recommendations of Hyderabad Municipal Development Authority (HMDA), the Government agreed the proposal and issued G.O.Ms.No.36 Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department dated 22.01.2011 permitting the respondents to allot/award 1000 sq.yards for every one acre land acquired in lieu of monetary compensation under Section 31(3) of Land Acquisition Act. It is stated when the said benefits were not extended to the petitioner, he filed W.P.No.19128/2006 and this Court vide order dated 28.02.2011 disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents to extend the benefit in terms of said G.O. When the respondents have not executed conveyance deed to the agreed extent of land/plot in lieu of compensation, the petitioner filed W.P.No.1836/2020 and this Court has granted interim order on 16.02.2023. The grievance of the petitioner in this contempt case is that even after specific directions issued by this Court to register the plot No.181 admeasuring 666.67 sq.yards allotted to the petitioner as per the allotment order dated 31.02.2016 duly relaxing the conditions, till date, the respondents have not taken any action and therefore, prayed this Court to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3. 3. After receipt of the notice in this Contempt Case, the respondent No.1 has filed counter inter alia stating that the land of the petitioner is abutting to the Inner Ring Road and as per the directions of the Government in Memo No.18829/11/2012 dated 01.08.2015, the Metropolitan Commissioner vide Proceedings No.LA/363/2005 dated 31.10.2016 allotted Plot No.181 admeasuring 666.67 sq.yards. It is further stated that various other persons were also allotted plots in lieu of compensation. In terms of the policy guidelines issued by the Government, it is stated one Sri Venu Gopal has filed W.P.No.9700/2017 praying this Court to direct the respondents not to allot land admeasuring 401 sq.yards in Sy.No.454 of Uppal Bhagayath Village of HMDA layout. This Court vide order dated 20.03.2017 granted interim direction in the said Writ Petition and the same is in force as on date. It is specific case of the respondents that to the extent of patta land admeasuring Ac.0- 05.5459 gts that was acquired, the petitioner is eligible to get 138.87 sq.yards and 138.87 sq.yards of developed land and the same was awarded vide award No.LA/363/156/05 dated 11.01.2012. The remaining extent of Ac.0-34.4451 gts for which the writ petitioner claimed compensation is covered under the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 and the same was declared as surplus and possession was taken over by the Government and hence no compensation is awarded. It is further stated that pending adjudication of the W.P.No.9700/2017, the petitioner filed subject W.P.No.1836/2020 seeking allotment of the land. It is stated that in view of the interim orders granted in W.P.No.9700 of 2017 not to allot land to an extent of 401 sq.yards in Sy.No.454 of HMDA layout and as the allotted Plot No.181 falls in Sy.No.454, the respondents could not execute the conveyance deed. Narrating the above facts, the respondents pleaded that there is no wilful and deliberate violation on their part to subject them for rigmarole of the contempt trial and prayed to close the contempt proceedings. 4. Pending adjudication of the contempt case, the respondents filed an undertaking memo dated 25.01.2024 stating that they are taking all possible steps for early disposal of W.P.No.9700/2017 which is having bearing for compliance of the orders passed in W.P.No.1836/2020 and soon after disposal of the said writ petition, they will implement the orders dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court. 5. Pending adjudication of the contempt case, the respondents filed an undertaking memo dated 25.01.2024 stating that they are taking all possible steps for early disposal of W.P.No.9700/2017 which is having bearing for compliance of the orders passed in W.P.No.1836/2020 and soon after disposal of the said writ petition, they will implement the orders dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court. 5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. 6. It is seen from the record that the petitioner’s land was acquired by the respondents in terms of the guidelines issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.36 dated 22.01.2011 on the assurance that they will allot a developed plot in lieu of monetary compensation under Section 31(3) of the Land Acquisition Act. It is stated that seeking to extend the said benefit, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.19128/2006 and in terms of the orders passed in the said writ petition, the petitioner was allotted Plot No.180. For the remaining extent of land, in terms of the award passed in Proceedings No.LA/363/156/05 dated 11.01.2012, the petitioner was allotted Plot No.181 to an extent of 666.67 sq.yards. The case of the respondents is that pending handing over of Plot No.181 allotted to the petitioner, a writ petition came to be filed by third party vide W.P.No.9700/2017 wherein interim orders were granted not to allot land to an extent of 401 sq.yards in Sy.No.454 and thus the respondents expressed their inability to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the petitioner in terms of the order dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1836/2020. 7. It is stated that the respondents have taken all measures for vacating the interim orders passed in W.P.No.9700/2017 and also filed an undertaking on 25.01.2024 stating that soon after vacation/ modification of the interim orders, the orders dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court would be implemented. It may be noted that even after lapse of more than one year, the respondents have not taken any measures either to vacate the interim orders passed in W.P.No.9700/2017 or preferred any appeal. Further, the respondents have neither provided any alternative site to the petitioner nor paid any compensation. It may be noted that even after lapse of more than one year, the respondents have not taken any measures either to vacate the interim orders passed in W.P.No.9700/2017 or preferred any appeal. Further, the respondents have neither provided any alternative site to the petitioner nor paid any compensation. In the absence of the same in their pleadings, it can be reasonably inferred that the respondents have not made bona fide efforts to have the interim orders vacated or to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the petitioner. These actions clearly demonstrate that the undertaking filed by the respondents was not in good faith but merely an attempt to avoid initiation of contempt proceedings. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, this Contempt Case is disposed of directing the respondents to execute conveyance deed in terms of the orders dated 16.02.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1836/2020 within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and a copy of the same shall be filed before the Registry, failing which, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two(2) weeks and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one(1) week. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.