THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14666 of 2002 Dated:15.06.2010 Between: D.V.Janardhan Gupta. ...Petitioner And The District Collector, Anantapur, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14666 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner statedly owns building bearing Door No.1-26 in Lepakhi Gram Panchayat. He acquired the title under a gift deed dated 17.11.1994 executed by his father who had purchased under sale deed dated 31.03.1967. A proposal was mooted by respondent Nos.1 and 2 to widen the Gram Panchayat road. In that connection it is alleged that without initiating the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and without issuing any notice by the Gram Panchayat under Sections 98 and 99 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the respondents threatened to demolish a portion of the petitioner’s house. Therefore, he filed the instant writ petition. This Court while admitting the writ petition stayed demolition observing that the petitioner shall not make any further construction on the road. Respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. A perusal of the affidavit would show that the proposal is to widen the road. I n P.Lakshmana Rao v. Executive Officer[1], a Division Bench of this Court issued directions to be followed by Municipal authorities, Panchayat authorities and Revenue authorities for acquiring the land for public purpose. Having regard to the decision of the Division Bench, I have considered similar issue in a number of writ petitions and culled out various principles of law to be followed by the Government while acquiring/utilizing the private land for road widening. The principles were reiterated by this Court in M.Madhavi Latha v. Rajendranagar Municipality[2], which are as follows. (1) Where a property is required for public purpose viz., widening of roads or for any other purpose, the authorities straightaway cannot take law into their hands and jump into the premises, dispossess or evict the occupants or demolish the property. (2) If the authorities concerned want to take action for eviction/dispossession of the occupants or demolition, they shall issue 60 days’ prior notice notifying as to the nature of the property, the property to whom it belongs and the proposed action calling for explanation/objections, if any, from the occupants. On receipt of such objections, if there is any objection as to the ownership of the property, the authorities should determine the extent of encroachment or unauthorised occupation and also determine whether the property in question belongs to Government/any other local self Government or authority or the occupants and pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of receipt of the objections, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the occupants. (3) In case where demolition of private property has already been made, the authorities shall determine the damages on the basis of the assessment to be made by the Engineer of the Roads and Buildings Department and disburse the amount of damages quantified forthwith. (4) If the demolition is in respect of local bodies’ Government property, the question of damages does not arise. In such an event, the occupant shall be entitled to remove the material used for the construction. (5) In case of demolition of private property, the authorities concerned shall determine the loss caused to the occupants on the basis of the assessment to be made by the Engineer of R&B Department and on such assessment of damages, the concerned authorities shall take appropriate steps to disburse the amount quantified forthwith. (6) If there is any claim for grant/assessment of the property, the concerned authorities shall consider the same in accordance with law taking into consideration the eligibility and the entitlement of occupants, after making enquiry and till such claim is decided, there shall be status quo obtaining as on today regarding the structures. The writ petition is disposed of as above directing maintenance of status quo as on today. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 15.06.2010 vs [1] 2000(5) ALT 246 (DB) [2] 2001(2) ALT 482