LAWS(TLNG)-2019-4-88

A. SRINIVASA REDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

Decided On April 04, 2019
A. Srinivasa Reddy Appellant
V/S
State of Telangana Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondents 1 to 5

(2.) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents 3 and 4 in trying to release the compensation amount in favour of the 6th respondent with respect to the land to an extent of Ac.3.14 gts in Sy.No.684, situated at Papkollu village, Julurpad Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District, without considering the objection/representation dated 26.02.2019, of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.

(3.) The petitioner asserts that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the aforesaid land and that the 2nd respondent has issued notification under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) (for short 'the Act'), on 26.01.2019, proposing to acquire the part of his land for the purpose of excavation of gravity canal under Sita Rama Lift Irrigation Project. He further asserts that in the said notification, the name of the 6th respondent was shown as owner of the subject property. He further asserts that the 6th respondent was only his 'kouldar' and he has no right over the said land and therefore, he is not entitled to receive the compensation. He further asserts that as the preliminary notification was issued on 26.01.2019 inviting objections from the interested persons, the petitioner has submitted his objection on 09.02.2019 before the Tahsildar; on 12.02.2019 before the District Collector; and finally on 26.02.2019 before the Special Deputy Collector. He further asserts that based on the objections filed by him, the Revenue Divisional Officer has directed the Tahsildar vide letter dated 11.10.2018, to conduct investigation, take necessary legal action based on the records and submit a report. In spite of the same, the petitioner apprehends that the respondents may not consider his objections as his name was not figured in the preliminary notification. He further asserts that he has placed all the material with respect to his right, title and enjoyment of the property for entitlement of compensation that may be awarded in the land acquisition proceedings.