BADUGU SATISH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the office of the learned Advocate General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 8, and Sri P.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for respondent Nos.9 and 10, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the 8th respondent had caused publication of notice dt.10/9/2024 vide Lr.No.B/488/2024, enclosing therewith Socio Economic Survey (SES) Report under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ( for short 'Act of 2013'), where under the petitioners' claim for Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) benefits was rejected stating that the petitioners have already received the R&R benefits, and called upon the affected parties as mentioned therein to submit their objections to the same within seven days; that the petitioners being aggrieved by the aforesaid SES Report, have submitted their explanation on 17/9/2024; and that no orders have been passed thereon till date.

(3.) It is the further case of the petitioners that while the aforesaid representation/objections submitted by the petitioners in response to the publication caused on 10/9/2024 is pending consideration, the authorities have issued notice under Sec. 22 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1950 (for short, 'the Act of 1950'), calling upon the petitioners as to why action should not be taken under the Act for deletion of their names from the electoral rolls under Sec. 22 of the Act of 1950 read with Rule 21A of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 (for short, 'the Rules').