AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the following relief:
... to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent authorities in attempting to widen the existing village road by taking over and interfering with the petitioner's private property in Assessment No.368 and H.No.4-54, situated at Mominapur Village, Maddur Mandal, Narayanpet District, without initiating any acquisition proceedings, without issuing any notice, without following the procedure established by law and without payment of compensation, thereby depriving the petitioner of his property as illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, in contrary to the settled law and in violation of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India. Consequently, to direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule property in Assessment No.368 and H.No.4-54, situated at Mominapur Village, Maddur Mandal, Narayanpet District, without initiating any acquisition proceedings, without issuing any notice, without following the procedure established by law and pass...
Heard Sri Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Shazia Parveen, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Brief facts of the case:
The petitioner's father, Late Sri B. Kankappa, was the absolute owner and possessor of the petition schedule property bearing Assessment No.368 and House No.4-54, situated at Mominapur Village, Maddur Mandal, Narayanpet District. During his lifetime, he obtained building permission from the Gram Panchayat vide Proceedings No.6/BP/2023, dated 25.07.2023, and constructed a residential building in accordance with the sanctioned plan. The building was thereafter assessed to property tax. After the demise of Late Sri B. Kankappa on 02.04.2024, the petitioner succeeded to the property as his legal heir and has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment thereof.
While so, the respondent authorities attempted to widen the existing village road by taking over a portion of the petitioner's property without issuing any notice, initiating acquisition proceedings or paying compensation. The petitioner submitted representations through Prajavani requesting the authorities not to interfere with his property except by following due process of law. Thereafter, the Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Narayanpet Division, vide Letter No.EE/R&B/NRPT/PRAJAVANI/ 2026-27/197 dated 11.06.2026 informed the District Collector, Narayanpet that the road in question does not pertain to the Roads and Buildings Department and falls within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat Raj Department. Aggrieved by the alleged action of the respondent authorities in interfering with the petitioner's property without following due process of law, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while undertaking the road widening work, the respondent authorities are taking a larger extent of land from the petitioner's side instead of maintaining equal width from both sides of the centre line of the road. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner submitted representations dated 08.06.2026 and 27.07.2026 requesting the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioner's property except by following due process of law and after payment of lawful compensation. Since no action has been taken on the said representations, learned counsel seeks a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, submits that respondent No.2 would consider the representations dated 08.06.2026 and 27.07.2026 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to consider the representations dated 08.06.2026 and 27.07.2026 submitted by the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.