Telangana High Court Partly Stays Land Acquisition Notification For Setting Up Multipurpose Industrial Park In Vikharabad District
The Telangana High Court has suspended part of a Notification, issued to acquire land for setting up a Multiple purpose Industrial Park in Vikharabad District after certain land owners moved the court contending that the study for Determination of Social Impact and Public Purpose under the Land Acquisition Act could not be dispensed with.
Justice J. Sreenivas Rao passed the order in two writ petitions where few petitioners were filed challenging the entire notification and others were challenging the issuance of notice to the extent their land.
The bench noted that the prayer to set aside the notification completely could not be granted, but granted relief to petitioners who questioned annexation of their land.
"In these writ petitions, the petitioners have raised several grounds, especially respondent No.2 has issued the impugned notifications by invoking the provisions of Section 10A of the Act by dispensing with the provisions of Chapter No.Il (Sections 4 to 9) deals with 'Determination of Social Impact and Public Purpose' and Chapter No.lll (Section 10) deals with Special Provision to Safeguard Food Security and also raised a ground that Section 10A of the Act would not applicable for the present notifications including the ground that the respondents have not invoked Section 40 of the Act....The petitioners have questioned the notifications in these writ petitions with respect to entire extent of land i.e., Acs.351.10 gts., and Acs.110.32 gts. respectively, though the petitioner in W.P.No.6898 of 2025 is claiming rights in respect of land ad measuring Acs.2.00 in Sy.No.252/103 and the petitioners in W.P.No.6973 of 2025 are claiming rights in respect of land ad measuring Acs.6.15 guntas. This Court is of the considered view that the petitioners are not entitled to seek stay of entire extent of land mentioned in the notifications. Accordingly, the impugned notifications, dated 29.11.2024, issued by respondent No.2 is stayed, only in respect of the petitioners' subject land i.e.. an extent of Acs.2.00 gts., in W.P.No.6898 of 2025 and an extent of Acs.6.15 gts., in W.P.No.693 of 2025."
Background
The dispute arose when the land owners approached the high court challenging the notifications issued in November for acquisition of 462 acers in Lagcherla Village, Vikharabad District for setting up for industrial park.
The main arguments raised by the petitioners were that the notification was passed without conducting a public hearing and a social impact assessment study as per section 4-9 of the Land Acquisition Act. It was contended that no objections were heard as per section 15 ; the exact extent of land which was to be acquired was not mentioned. It was contended that the market value of the land was not determined nor was 80% of compensation amount deposited as per section 26. It was also argued that the urgency clause not invoked as per section 40.
The Special Government Pleader appearing for the State argued the specifics extents were not indicated as the entire survey number land was sought to be acquired. The possession of the petitioners on the disputed suit site was also questioned. That different notification were issued for administrative convenience.
After hearing both sides, the Bench concluded that the issues raised would require deliberations after filing of counter.
"Whether the impugned notifications issued by respondent No.2 exercising the provisions of Section 10A of the Act by dispensing with Chapter Nos.ll and III is permissible or not, including the applicability of Section 40 of the Act, those aspects have to be required detailed adjudication/ examination basing on the counter affidavit of the respondents."
Thus, the court stayed the notification to the extent of the petitioners land and posted the matter for filing of counter on April. 7.
Case title : Kummari Shiva Kumar vs. State of TG. and batch
Counsel for petitioners: B.S. Prasad Senior Counsel. V. Ragunath, Senior Counsel.
Counsel for State: S. Rahul Reddy