Telangana High Court
Madi Satyavathi vs State Of Telangana on 12 July, 2023
Author: T.Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK
Writ Appeal No.676 of 2023
JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar) This Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dt.07.02.2023 passed in W.P.No.13995 of 2021, as reviewed and modified by order dt.23.06.2023 in Rev.I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.13995 of 2021.
2. The 1st appellant before this Court is the 1st petitioner in the writ petition and appellant Nos.2 to 4 are the daughters of the 1st appellant, and who have joined the 1st appellant/1st petitioner as petitioner Nos.2 to 4 in the writ petition.
3. The grievance of the 1st appellant is that though the proceedings dt.30.04.2021, have been issued under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, the Act 30 of 2013'), for acquiring her land for the purpose of laying of new railway line from Manuguru Railway Station to Bhadradri Thermal Power Station, no award was passed and the compensation determined as payable is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act 30 of 2013.
4. It is the further grievance of appellant Nos.2 to 4 that they would also be entitled for rehabilitation benefits under Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013.
5. The appellants further contend that inasmuch as the proceeding impugned in the writ petition is not in consonance with the provisions of Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013, the appellants are precluded from seeking reference under Section 64 2 of the Act for proper determination of the compensation payable under the Act 30 of 2013.
6. The learned Single Judge initially by his order, dt.07.02.2023, while disposing of the writ petition, had held that the proceeding dt.30.04.2021, has all the requirements of an award and also having regard to the fact that the 1st appellant/petitioner has already received compensation, was not inclined to interfere with the process of acquisition.
7. However, in the review petition filed, vide Rev.I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.13995 of 2021, learned Single Judge of this Court, while disposing of the same, vide order dt.23.06.2023, had directed the 6th respondent to pass an appropriate award as contemplated under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 in Forms 9 and 10 in respect of the amounts already paid to the appellant(s)/petitioner(s) within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
8. The appellants before this Court, particularly the appellant Nos.2 to 4, would contend that, inasmuch as the said direction as issued to the 6th respondent to pass an award as contemplated under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013, is applicable only in respect of the 1st appellant, since, it is the 1st appellant only would be treated as 'land owner'; and that the learned Single Judge, while disposing of the said review application failed to take into consideration that the appellant Nos.2 to 4 would also be eligible to the benefit under Section 31 of the Act 3 of 2013 of R & R package they fall under the category of 'affected family'.
9. We have heard Sri Ch.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants/petitioners, and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents and perused the orders of the learned Single Judge. 3
10. The definition of 'land owner' under Section 3(r)(ii) of the Act 30 of 2013 also includes 'any person who is granted forest rights under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) (ROFR) Act, 2006 (2 of 2007)'.
11. Admittedly, the 1st appellant/1st petitioner has been granted a ROFR patta for the land admeasuring Ac.1.54 cents in Vijianagaram H/o Ramanujavaram Village, Manuguru Mandal, Bhadradri-Kothagudem District. It is a matter of record that in the notification issued in Form 6 for acquiring the land, including the land of the 1st appellant/petitioner, the name of the 1st appellant has been shown as holding ROFR patta. Once the 1st appellant is considered as holding ROFR patta and being considered as 'land owner', as defined in Section 3(r)(ii) of the Act 30 of 2013, not only the 'land owner', who would be considered as 'affected family', but also the family members of the said 'land owner' would be eligible for being considered as an 'affected family' under Section 3(c)(ii) of the Act 30 of 2013.
12. If the said provisions are taken into consideration, while the 'land owner' is entitled for compensation under Section 28 and for Solatium under Section 30 and benefits under Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme as per Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013, the family members i.e. appellant Nos.2 to 4, would also be eligible for benefits under Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013, as they would be covered by the definition of 'affected family'.
13. Since, the learned Single Judge, while reviewing the order dt.07.02.2023 in W.P.No.13995 of 2021 and by directing the 6th respondent to pass appropriate award as contemplated under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013, however, did not take into consideration the applicability of the provisions of Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 insofar as appellant Nos.2 to 4 are concerned. Further, no specific direction with 4 regard to passing of award under Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 for appellant Nos.2 to 4 has been given, inasmuch as the award as directed to be passed under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 is applicable only in respect of the 1st appellant/1st petitioner and not for appellant Nos.2 to 4.
14. In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to modify the order of the learned Single Judge in Rev.I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.13995 of 2021 dt.23.06.2023 directing the 6th respondent also to pass R & R award under Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 and determine the claim of appellant Nos.2 to 4 for the benefit of R&R Award under Section 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 being an 'affected family' and to pass an award. It is made clear that upon the 6th respondent passing an award under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act 30 of 2013 in respect of the 1st appellant as well as R & R award in respect of appellant Nos.2 to 4, it is open for the appellants to seek a reference under Section 64 of the Act 30 of 2013 before the appropriate authority under the Act, if they are aggrieved by such determination.
15. Subject to the above clarification and modification, the Writ Appeal is allowed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.
__________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J Date:12.07.2023 _________________ PULLA KARTHIK, J GJ 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK Writ Appeal No.676 of 2023 (per Hon'ble Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar) 12.07.2023 GJ