Lingam Sri Rama Murthy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 February, 2025

0
3

Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati

Lingam Sri Rama Murthy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 February, 2025

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
                           (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                   FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
                     TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

                                      PRESENT


                  THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

                         WRIT PETITION NO: 3059 OF 2025


Between:

Lingam     Sri    Rama    Murthy,   S/o   L.   Subbarao,   aged     about 61      years,
R/o.D.No.#4-14-181/C, Anjaneyapet, 2"^^ Lane, Amaravathi Road, Guntur.
                                                                       ...PETITIONER

                                          AND

   1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary,
      Municipal Administration Department and Urban Development
      Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur
      District.

   2. The Guntur Municipal Corporation, Rep. By its Commissioner, Guntur
      Municipal Corporation Office, 0pp. Gandhi Park, Lalapet, Guntur.
                                                                   ...RESPONDENTS

         Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may

be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the
                                                                                          nd
nature    of     WRIT OF MANDAMUS              declaring   the    action   of   the   2

respondent in a) giving markings to petitioners property i.e 20.5 sq. yards
of land along RCC roof structure bearing D.No.6-19- 43/F/I, on main road
between 10*^ and 11'^ lane. Arundelpet, Guntur City, Guntur District, b)
pressurising the petitioner to accept TDR certificates by handing over her
property to the 2nd respondent for proposed road widening of the Main
road from Lodge Center (D.R.B.R.Ambedkar Circle) to Hindu College
Junction to a width of 120 feet as per road development plan and c)
 initiating steps to demolish the said property of the petitioner without
following the procedure under The Right To Fair Compensation               And

Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resettlement Act,
2013 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct        the

Respondent No.2 not to interfere with the possession and ownership of
Petitioner over his property i.e 20.5 sq. yards of land along RCC roof
                                                                     th
structure bearing D.No.6-19-43/F/1, on main road between 10th and 11
lane, Arundelpet, Guntur City,      Guntur District, without following the
procedure contemplated under The Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and            Resettlement

Act, 2013.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025

      Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to direct the 2^^ respondent and its staff not to interfere with
possession enjoyment of petitioner over his property i.e 20.5 sq. yards of
land along RCC roof structure bearing D.No.6-19-43/F/1,         on main road

between 10*" and 1l'^ lane, Arundelpet, GunturCity, Guntur District in any
manner including trespass, dispossession, demolition or blocking the
ingress/ egress from shop, or canvassing to stop the customers.
Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP MUNCIPAL ADMN & URBAN DEV
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI A.S.C.BOSE, SC FOR MUNC &
                                       MUNC CORPORATION

The Court made the following: ORDER
                                        1



APHC010055792025

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                   AT AMARAVATI                      [3333]
                            (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                    FRIDAY. THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
                      TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

                                  PRESENT

                   THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

                         WRIT PETITION NO: 3059/2025

Between:


Lingam Sri Rama Murthy                                        ...PETITIONER

                                     AND


The State of Andhra Pradesh and others                    ...RESPONDENT{S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

   1.SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

   1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

The Court made the following:
                                                  2




ORDER;


      This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking the following relief:


                 to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the
           nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2
                                                                                 nd




           respondent in a) giving markings to petitioner's property i.e., 20.5
           sq.yards of land along RCC roof structure bearing D.No.6-19-43/F/1,
           on main road between      and 11'" lane, Arundelpet, Guntur City,
           Guntur District b) pressurising the petitioner to accept TDR
           certificates by handing over her property to the 2"^' respondent for
           proposed road widening of the Main road from Lodge               Center

           (DR.B.R.Ambedkar Circle) to Hindu College Junction to a width of
           120 feet as per road development plan and c) initiating steps to
           demolish the said property of the petitioner without following the
           procedure under The Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency
           In Land Acquisition Rehabilitation And Resettlement Act, 2013 as
           illegal,   arbitrary,   unconstitutional   and   consequently     direct

           Respondent No. 2 not to interfere with the possession and ownership
           of Petitioner over his property i.e. 20.5 sq.yards of land along RCC
           roof structure bearing D.No.6-19-43/F/1, on main road between lO"'
           and 11'^ lane, Arundelpet, Guntur City, Guntur District,        without

           following the procedure contemplated under The Right to             Fair

           Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation
           and Resettlement Act 2013         "


2.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned                    Government


Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent

No.1 and learned Standing Counsel for Guntur Municipal Corporation for
respondent No.2.


3.
      During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would
submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the
                                                  3




 order dated 22.01,2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1400 of 2025 and

 requested to pass a similar order in this Writ Petition also. The same is not

disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The operative
portion of the said order, reads as under;


                "....In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition
             pending, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2''"' respondent
             not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner without following
             the procedure as contemplated under the Right to                    Fair
             Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition                   and
             Rehabiiitation and Resettlement Act, 2013."


4.       In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this

Writ Petition is also disposed of, in terms of the order, dated 22.01.2025

passed by this Court in W.P.No.1400 of 2025. There shall be no order as to

costs.



5.
         Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order, dated 22.01.2025
passed by this Court in W.P.No.1400 of 2025 to this order. No order as to

costs.




         Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any          in this Writ Petition shall stand

closed.
                                                                       Sd/- K. TATA RAO
                                                                     DEPUTY REGISTRAR
                                      //TRUE COPY//


                                                                        SECTION OFFICER
To,

      1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development
         Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Buildings,
         Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
 2. The Commissioner, Guntur Municipal Corporation, Guntur Municipal
     Corporation Office, Opp: Gandhi Park, Lalapet, Guntur.
3. One CC to Sri Sasanka Bhuvanagiri, Advocate [OPUC]
4. Two CCs to GP Municipal Admn & Urban Dev, High Court of Andhra
     Pradesh. [OUT]
5. One CC to Sri A.S.C.Bose, SC for MUNC & MUNC Corporation.
     [OPUC]
6. Three CD Copies.
gi
 HIGH COURT


DATED:07/02/2025




ORDER

WP.No.3059 of 2025

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS
1

APHC010025772025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

WRIT PETITION NO: 1400/2025

Between:

Gudipudi Anjani Kumari                                      ...PETITIONER

                                   AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh and another                ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:

   1.AKKISHORE REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
   1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP

The Court made the following:
                                                 2




ORDER:


This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking the following relief:

“… to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the
Respondents herein particulady Respondent No. 2 in touching upon
the Petitioner’s building situated at D.No.6-19-38/2, Arundalpet,
Guntur City, Guntur District (Shop No. 24 given by Municipality) and
giving markings without having any right or authority highhandedly
and subjecting the petitioner to distress as nothing but illegal,
erroneous, highhanded and violative of Article 14, 19(i)(g), 21 and
300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the
Respondents much less the Respondent No. 2 not to meddle with the
petitioner’s building situated at D.No.6-19-38/2, Arundalpet, Guntur
City, Guntur District (Shop No. 24 given by Municipality) without
following the procedure contemplated under The Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader

for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and

learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2.

3.
The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the house

bearing Door No.6-19-38/2, Arundalpet, Guntur City, Guntur District (shop

No.24 given by Municipality), where the petitioner is residing and carrying on

his own business. While the matter being so, the respondents are intending to

give markings to their shop for road widening purpose without following due

process of law and without paying fair compensation to her. However, the

case of the petitioner is also that the respondents have orally informed that

they will give TDR certificate instead of fair compensation.
3

4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned

Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, informed this Court

that they are intending to issue a notice under Section 146 of APMC Act

1955, to the petitioner and follow the procedure as contemplated under

Sections 146 and 147 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955

much less the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

5. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the writ

petition is disposed of directing the 2″‘^ respondent not to interfere with the

possession of the petitioner without following the procedure as contemplated

under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition

and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand

closed.

JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
Date: 22.01.2025
KGR



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here