Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Ponnapalli Rama Krishna Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 April, 2023

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARA
                        (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

                TUESDAY, THETWENTYFIFTH DAYOFAPRIL                           ',
                   T\^/O THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE
                               :PRESENT:
             THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

                        WRIT PETITION NO: 6351 OF 2018                  ,
Betwee n :
       Dr. Ponnapalli Rama Krishna Rao, S/o. Late Subrahmanyarn, Aged 82
       years, R/o. 7-1-62, Main Road, Narsapuram, West Godavari District
                                                               ...Petitioner
                                   AND
   1. The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Seoretary, MunicieaI
      Administration and Urban Development Authority Department, Seoretariat
      Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
   2. Narsapur MunicipalityJ Narsapur, West Godavari District, Rep.by its
       Commissioner.
                                                                    ...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 order or direction more parfioularly one in the nature Writ
of mandamus, directing the respondents to pay damages/compensation for the
land taken by the respondents by infringing the constitutional rights under Article
300-A of the Constitution of India and in violation of direction of. this Honble Court
in WP No. 25496 of 2008 and as per provisions of the Risht to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-
settlement Act, 2013, declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the
compensation highly arbitrary, illegal and preposterous and in violation of Article
                                                                                         ~

                                                                                         /
14 of the Constitution of India.

lANO: 1 OF2018
        Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased
to direct the respondents to determine and pay compensation to the petitioner
within a week days from the date of order, pending disposal of wp 6351 of 2018,
on the file of the High Court.

       The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the earlier order of the High Court dated
23.06.2018 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S V R
Subrahmanyam, Advocate for the Petitioner and of GP for Municipal
Administration for the Respondent No.1 and Sri. G.Naresh Kumar, learnecl counsel
Present and appearing for Sri.M.Manohar Reddy, leamed Standing Counsel for the
respondent No. 2, the Court made the following.
 ORDER..
     {fThjs Petition has been filed by the petitl-oner for direction to the
Biiiiiii
Respondents to pay damages/compensation for the land taken by the
Respondents for road widening.                 r
2)       On 13.04.2023, thefoIIowing orderwas passed.I
     1) "This petition has been filed by the petitioner for direction to the

        F=p_ondents to pay damageslcompensation for the land taken by
        the Respondents in road widening.
     2) He submits that the land and the building belong to the petitioner's
        wife, a part of which was taken in the road widening, for payment of
        compensation, the petitioner's wife smt. K.Sectharatnam [since
        deceased] filed Writ Petitic,n No. 25496 of 2OO8, which was allowed
       by judgment, dated 24.O3.2O14, "directing the Respondents to
       i:itiate action afresh under the provisions of A.P. Municipalities Act,
       1965, and pay compensation to the petitioner [present petitioner's
       wife] to an extent of her property alffected and the said exercise
       shall be completed, within a period of six months from the date of
       receipt of a copy of this order''.
 3) He submits that, thereafter the Municipal commissioner, Narsapur,
       sought for the legal opinion vide Roe. No. 246/2010/G1, dated
       o2.09.2016, for dctermining the compensation, but, since then,
       nothing has been done in-spite of the present petitioner having
      Served legal notice, dated 24.01.2018.
 4) A: requested by sri. ch. Rayan Abhishek, Advocate, appearing for
      the learned Standing counsel for the Respondent No. 2, post the
      matter on 25.04.2023 for further hearing."
      previously, on 26.02.2O18, this Court passed the following order:
      "ft_ _request    of   learned   Government   pleader   for   Municipal

      Admini_:tration for respondent No. 1 to gct instructions and- by
      recording the offer to file vakalat by Sr-I. N. Venkateswarlu, learned

      ?tending counsel for respondent No. 2 and to get written
     instructions /counter, post on o2.O4.2O18.
        There shall be interim direction to the respondents tO initiate the
       proceedings as contemplated by Sections 42 & 174 of the
       Municipal-ItieS Act,1965."
4)      None of the Respondents have filed the counter affidavit.
5)      lt is submitted by the Petitioner's Counsel that the Judgment, dated
24.03.2014, passed in W.P. No. 25496 of 2008 filed by the Petitioner's
deceased-wife has also not been complied till date. He further submits that in-
spite of the interim order no proceeding has been init-Iated in terms Of the
order therein for making payment of compensation, though the land has been
taken in road widening.
6)      The present petition pertains to the year 2018. The previous pet-ItiOn Was
filed in the year 20O8, which was decided on 24.03.2014, but in-spite of lapse of
more than nine [09] years, nothing has been done towards ensuring the
payment of compensation to the Petitioner.
7)      Post   ll.05.2023,   on   which   date   the    Respondent    No.   2   -   the
Commissioner, Narsapur Municipality, shall appear personally before this
Court to explalln -€as to wh'at further follow up action has been taken pursuant
to the order, dated 26.O2.2018, passed by this Court in the present writ pet-ItiOn
as also the final judgment, dated 24.03.2014, passed -In W.P. No. 25496 of 20O8,
and if not, the justification for such inaction".
8)       Sri. G.Naresh Kumar, learned counsel present and appearing for
Sri.M.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 2l
shall communicate this order to 2nd Respondent."               --~~~---Sd/-U. -SRrbEV[
                                                             ASS I sTANT£=:

                                  /ITRUE COPY//
                                                                     SECTION OFFICER
                                                       For
To,
     1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development
        Authority Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings,
        Velagapudi, Guntur District.
     2. The Commissioner Narsapur Municipality, Narsapur, West Godavari ~
        District.(1 & 2 by Speed Post) .
     3. One CC to Sri. S V R Subrahmanyam, Advocate [OPUC]
     4. One CC to Sri M. Manohar Reddy, Standing Counsel [OPUC]
     5. Two cos to GP for Municipal Administration, High Court of AP. [OUT]
  6. One spare copy.
MSB
  HIGH COURT




 RNT,J




DATED : 25/04/2O23




ORDER

POST ON ll.05.2023 WP.No.6351 of 2018 APPEARANCE I T#(: i-```\` '' *-

-.i.E#'