challenging the action of the respondents in insisting the petitioner to vacate from the house bearing Plot No.4, admeasuring 131.66 sq. yards in Sy.No.552/4 situated in Prasanthi Nagar Colony, Singupuram Gram Panchayat, Srikakulam Rural Mandal, Srikakulam District, for the purpose of construction of drainage.=the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of his house property, his possession shall not be interfered with by the respondents-authorities without following due process of law as enjoined whether under the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or in any other law.

WP 12787 / 2016 WPSR 67487 / 2016 CASE IS:DISPOSED
PETITIONER RESPONDENT
IJJU VENKATA RAO, SRIKAKULAM DIST VS PRL SECY, PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVP DEPT., HYD & 4 OT

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
WRIT PETITION No.12787 OF 2016
ORDER:
The writ petition is filed challenging the action of the
respondents in insisting the petitioner to vacate from the house
bearing Plot No.4, admeasuring 131.66 sq. yards in Sy.No.552/4
situated in Prasanthi Nagar Colony, Singupuram Gram Panchayat,
Srikakulam Rural Mandal, Srikakulam District, for the purpose of
construction of drainage.
The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner and
possessor of the above said land as the same was acquired by him
through a registered sale deed dated 17.07.2010 for a valuable
consideration and since then the petitioner has been in possession
and enjoyment of the same. While things stood thus, all of a sudden,
the respondents 2 to 5 decided to construct a drainage in the colony
of the petitioner and entrusted the said work to the private contractor
and the said contractor started the construction of drainage in the
house site property of the petitioner even without giving any prior
notice. It is further stated that the respondents authorities did not
initiate any proceedings for acquisition of the land in question as per
the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Hence, the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondentsauthorities
are making hectic efforts to dispossess the petitioner from
the house property in question even without following the due
procedure of law for acquiring the land for any public purpose.
Learned Government Pleader for Panchyat Raj submits that the
allegations made by the petitioner are false. If really the petitioner is
to be evicted, the respondents-authorities would follow the due
process of law and appropriate steps would be taken in accordance
with law.
In the light of the submissions made by the respective counsel
and in view of the admitted facts of the case that the petitioner is in
possession and enjoyment of his house property, his possession
shall not be interfered with by the respondents-authorities without
following due process of law as enjoined whether under the Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or in any other
law.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the
petitioner except following due process of law. No order as to costs.
In view of the disposal of the main writ petition, Miscellaneous
Petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall also stand closed.
______________________________
CHALLA KODANDA RAM,J
Date:19.04.2016.
Gk
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
WRIT PETITION No.12787 OF 2016
Date:19.04.2016
Gk