Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court single bench of Justice J Sreenivas Rao “stayed” the notification dated November 29,2024 vide Gazette no. VKB-15/2024 issued by the government acquiring more than 351.10 acres in Hakimpet village, Dudiyala mandal, Vikarabad district and 110.032 acres in Lagacherla village for establishing “multipurpose industrial park” ( more than 450 acres)

The judge issued notices to the Principal Secretary (Land Acquisition), Revenue department, district collector, RDO and tahsildar, Lagacherla division and Dudiyala mandal, and MD, Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd, directing them to file their detailed replies and adjourned the two writs to March 21.

The judge heard the petitions filed by Kummari Shiva Kumar, agriculturist of Hakimpet challenging acquisition of 351.10 acres and the other writ filed by Pathlavith Gopal Naik and 15 others, all residents of Lagacherla challenging acquisition of 110-32 acres in Lagacherla.

B S Prasad, former Advocate-General during the BRS regime, and Verose Raghunath, senior counsel, argued for the petitioners belong to SC/ST and BC communities, who eke out their livelihood by cultivating land… more so their land is fertile; they vehemently opposed the acquisition, when the officials approached them.

The counsels contended that the petitioners in both writs had approached the Vikarabad collector expressing serious concern over the land to be acquired and displayed their dissent, but all their efforts went futile before officials.

The counsels argued that the government had acquired the land invoking Section 10(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 which says that in public interest by notification in Gazette exempt any of the following projects from application of the provisions of chapter-II and III which clearly speak about the projects involving national security or defence, irrigation.

But in this the government is acquiring more than 450 acres for establishing “multipurpose industrial park”, does not fall in any of the clause as cited in Section 10(A).

The counsels also argued that the government had not adhered to any sections and rules under the Act, social impact assessment, receiving of objections from land-owners, payment of compensation to land-losers under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013.

Justice Rao after hearing the counsels and the Special Government Pleader, was not convinced with the contention of SGP Rahul Reddy, who informed the court that the land is sought to be acquired for establishing a multipurpose industrial park, but failed to apprise the court and convince it how much land is actually required for the purpose; no clarity was given on fixing compensation to the landowners.

Hearing in the case was adjourned to March 21 for filing counter-affidavits; until then the notification stayed.