HON’BLE SHRI G.S.SINGHVI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.22809, 22810 & 26996 of 2006 Writ Petition No.22809 of 2006 Between: M/s. Jayabheri Properties Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Director, Hyderabad and others. …Petitioners And State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri D. Prakash Reddy, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri E. Ajay Reddy. Counsel for respondent No.1: Sri J. Sudheer, Special Government Pleader. Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri T. Niranjan Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4: Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy, Senior Advocate and Advocate General with Sri P. Rajagopala Rao. Writ Petition No.22810 of 2006 Between: M/s. Jayabheri Properties Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Director, Hyderabad and others. …Petitioners And State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri D. Prakash Reddy, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri E. Ajay Reddy. Counsel for respondent No.1: Sri J. Sudheer, Special Government Pleader. Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri T. Niranjan Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4: Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy, Senior Advocate and Advocate General with Sri P. Rajagopala Rao. Writ Petition No.26996 of 2006 Between: T. Chittaiah and others. …Petitioners And State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P. Sree Raghuram, for Smt. D. Radha Rani. Counsel for respondent No.1: Sri J. Sudheer, Special Government Pleader. Counsel for respondent No.2: Sri T. Niranjan Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4: Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy, Senior Advocate and Advocate General with Sri P. Rajagopala Rao. :: O R D E R :: October 01, 2007 Per G.S. Singhvi, C.J. These petitions involve adjudication of the petitioners’ challenge to Notifications dated 13.12.2005 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the 1894 Act’) and draft declarations dated 14.6.2006 and 29.7.2006 issued under Section 6 of the 1894 Act for acquisition of land comprised in Survey Nos.176, 189, 190, 191, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 and 202 of Narsingi Village, and Survey Nos.292, 293 and 294 of Poppalguda Village of Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District for a public purpose i.e. Outer Ring Road (ORR) Project. History of ORR and related developments: The Master Plan of the twin cities envisage the laying of Inner Ring Road, Intermediate Ring Road and Outer Ring Road as part of the main circulation system. In 1984, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (for short, ‘HUDA’) undertook detailed study for the development of the Intermediate Ring Road, but nothing concrete appears to have been done in that regard. With the growth of the city and advent of I.T. industry and various other educational and industrial projects, it was felt that Outer Ring Road is required to be planned and undertaken to cater to the future needs. The matter was examined at various levels from 1997 onwards. Initially, HUDA prepared alignment for ORR in consultation with Municipal Administration and Urban Development, I.T., Industries and Commerce, and Roads and Buildings Departments, A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation and Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. In the year 2001, the Government of Andhra Pradesh initiated Outer Ring Road (ORR) Project. HUDA engaged M/s.MECON for feasibility study. The reports submitted by M/s.MECON envisaged laying of 109 km. 4-lane connectivity around the city. In July, 2004, the State Government re- examined the project and on the recommendations of the group of senior officers of the government and HUDA, the project was revised so that ORR may pass through open areas avoiding major settlements and habitations. The revised project was notified vide G.O.Ms.No.442, dated 19.10.2004. In April, 2005, the ORR alignment was finalized with 159 km. road around the twin cities and Ranga Reddy District. The final alignment comprised of four sectors i.e. western, northern, eastern and southern. Thereafter, notifications dated 13.4.2005 and 21.4.2005 were issued under Section 4 (1) of the 1894 Act for acquisition of various parcels of land in different sectors. Since the ailment of western sector was through Poppalguda, Vattinagulapalli, Janawada, Kolluru and Edulanagulapally villages, representations were made for change thereof on the premise that the road will be passing through hillocks, tanks and lakes. In the wake of these representations, the notified alignment was inspected by the officers of the technical wing of the ORR Project. They found that the alignment involves huge rock cutting, which will be uneconomical. M/s.Aarvee Associates, who was engaged for preparation of plan for Phase-I of ORR, proposed Trumpet Interchange at the T-Junction point where Phase-II joins the Phase-I of ORR. When the Trumpet Interchange was incorporated at Poppalguda Junction, it was found to be affecting the water body and school building. Therefore, an alternative alignment was considered by a committee comprising Principal Secretary, Infrastructure and Investment Department (IID), Managing Director, INCAP, Vice-Chairman, HUDA, Project Director, Chief Engineer and Special Collector, ORR, Secretary, IID, Land Acquisition Officer, HUDA, Executive Engineer, ORR and Planning Officer, HUDA. In the meeting of the committee, it was decided to examine various alternatives in the western sector of ORR. The committee inspected the alternatives twice on 6th and 19th October, 2005 and submitted report with the following observations: a) The committee made a thorough examination of 3rd alternative via Kokapet, Narsingi. The Kokapet tank was marked with Full Tank Level and Maximum Water Level and it was found that slight portion of tank is affected in the alignment proposed. b) The committee felt that it is an important tank, which needs to be further strengthened by the irrigation department, as the tank can be developed as water source and recreation purposes for Future Township in the area. c) The 2nd alignment, which is the existing (Notified) alignment, passes through rocky portion at the end where junction has to be planned. There may be need to shift the junction downwards, which in turn affects certain institutions and water bodies. d) The 1st alignment via Nanakram guda is comparatively free from environmental or technical difficulties. However, it passes through rocky terrain in certain portions. The impact of this in financial terms needs to be worked out before any inferences can be made. e) The committee felt that all the three alternatives have designed by project engineers with sketchy data available. Because of constraint of time, detailed examination has not been conducted on all these alternatives. It was felt that a quick survey should be conducted based on following broad principles: i) The alignment should not affect any water body, as it is environmentally sensitive zone. ii) The alignment should involve minimal rock cutting and filling, as the terrain is uneven. iii) The alignment should involve minimal bends and curves keeping the design standards of Outer Ring Road in mind.” The matter was then assigned to NSS Associates, who submitted report dated 15.11.2005 with the recommendation that the notified western alignment joining Phase-I at Poppalguda is not advisable and that an alternative alignment passing through Narsingi Village could be worked out in view of the following advantages: · The geometrics of the proposed alignment and the terrain conditions are suitable for the design speed requirements. Further due to the availability of suitable gradient the Trumpet Interchange can easily be accommodated. · The volume of rock cutting involved for already notified alignment is 6,78,097 cum. But whereas the rock cutting for the proposed one is only 56,600 cum. This also has consequences on cost and time for execution of the project. · Extra Land Acquisition is required for the notified alignment because of cutting to a tune of 18 M and Embankment of the heights of about 8M. This is completely avoided in the suggested alignment. · The cost comparison (Statement enclosed) clearly indicates that the overall cost for the stretch would be reduced by 18.06 crores (the cost of the proposed alignment is about 0.427% of the notified western alignment joining Phase-I (ORR) at Poppalguda alignment). · Further the proposed alignment would also reduce the operating cost of vehicles. After considering the report of NSS Associates, the State Government issued G.O.Rt.No.87, dated 2.11.2005 and constituted another committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Alignment Committee’) comprising the following: 1. Secretary to Govt., MA & UD … Chairman 2. Vice-Chairman, HUDA … Member 3. VC & MD, INCAP … Member 4. Collector, RR District … Member 5. Collector, Medak District … Member 6. Project Director & Spl. Collr., ORR … Member-Convenor The Alignment Committee again studied the entire matter, considered the three alternative alignments, reports prepared by the expert group i.e. NSS Associates and the departmental committee, which inspected the area on 6th and 19th October, 2005 and recommended that the alignment suggested by NSS Associates be accepted. The relevant extracts of the committee’s report insofar as it relates to the western sector alignment is reproduced below: “C. Western Sector Alignment: Originally the alignment has been proposed and notified in the western sector passing through Popalguda, Vattinagulapalli, Janawada, Kolluru and Edulanagulapally revenue villages. Pursuant to the objections raised by APPCB, alternative alignments in the region were examined and detailed discussions were held in the meeting held on 09.6.2005, wherein, the Principal Secretary, IID, Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, INCAP, Managing Director, HMWS & SB, Member Secretary, APPCB, Vice-Chairman, HUDA and Project Director, ORR were present. The Member Secretary, APPCB informed that in light of Supreme Court judgments and G.O.111, MA, clearances for the project will be difficult if it is passing through the catchment area. A decision has been taken to approach the APPCB with alternative and complete technical details for the consideration and opinion of technical committee and in-principle clearance. After submission of the alternatives, the technical committee, APPCB in its meeting held on 22.7.2005 has given clearance to the alignment passing through the catchment for a length of 1.64 kms, as against 7.60 kms. of notified alignment. However, certain difficulties arose in finalizing the alignment as opined by the Pollution Control Board. While the alignment could be earmarked within the catchment of Osman Sagar, but no suitable RoW was available to connect the alignment to Phase I. Due to presence of hillocks, water bodies and well-developed areas it was difficult to identify suitable RoW. Accordingly, Departmental Committee examined all possibilities and narrowed three alternatives including the notified alignment. Alternative I A reconnaissance survey has been conducted with the team of officers from Engineering, Planning and Revenue departments and alternate alignment plan is prepared. The new alignment entails slight modification in the western sector from Popalguda Village to Velimela Village, avoiding major extents of Osman Sagar catchment area. The intersection with Gachibouli segment (phase I) is also shifted by about 500 mts. so as to enable a straight alignment and avoid major hilly portions. Due care has been taken to avoid all major structures, water bodies and habitations. Certain extents of hilly terrain are encountered, but these are unavoidable as the whole area is rocky. The proposed alignment avoids environmental or any other major objections. However, the alignment passes through the Financial District proposal and affects number of projects proposed in the area. An alternative to this alignment was worked out. Alternative II A completely hillock-free path was identified from Vattinagulapally South-east to Narsingi (5000 m from Gachibouli Jn.) The changes were suggested with a view to avoid the hillocks at Popalguda and Vattinagulapally East and further if the ORR joins the Link Road at Narsingi, the ORR would pass through about 45 Ac. of Govt. land in Sy.No.205 of Narsingi. The advantage in this alignment was that entire junction could be planned in government land available, thereby reducing the requirement of land acquisition. But, certain objections were raised that this alignment affects the Kokapeta cheruvu. The Principal Secretary constituted a departmental committee comprising Managing Director, INCAP, Vice-Chairman, HUDA and Project Director, ORR to examine the three alternatives (above two and the existing one) and propose best possible alignment keeping financial, environmental and technical considerations in view. Experts’ Report: The Departmental committee inspected the alignment on ground twice, on 6th & 19th October and made following observations: The committee felt that all the three alternatives have been designed by project engineers with sketchy data available. Because of constraint of time detailed examination has not been conducted on all these alternatives. It was felt that a quick survey should be conducted based on the broad principles of environmental, technical and financial parameters. In view of the above facts, the committee felt that no inference could be drawn until detailed engineering study is conducted for all three alternatives. Accordingly, a study was conducted jointly by the Aarvi Associates and the NSS for all three alternatives in the Western Sector. The Report of the Experts is enclosed in the Annexure III. The notified western alignment joining Phase-I (ORR) at Poppulguda is running through major hilly region of the heights ranging from 30 to 40 meters encompassing water bodies, aligning close to High tension power lines and running very close to the Vattinagulapally and the other villages which are notified in G.O.Ms.No.111 of M.A. & U.D. Dept. This alignment was finalized based on the HUDA base maps only without application of relevant aspects of road engineering principles and Geometry. This alignment when studied now in detail, it is observed that it suffers from basic infirmities like: · Improper connectivity to the Phase-I ORR at Poppalaguda. The ‘T’ Junction Interchange cannot be accommodated here because of large level difference between the Joining Roads within the available space resulting into encroaching into water bodies. · The longitudinal gradient that has to be adopted will be almost 1 in 50 for a stretch of 2.5 KM, which is not advisable for a design speed of 120 KMPH. § For the alternative alignment now proposed the longitudinal gradient is working out to 1 in 80 which will be very comfortable for heavy vehicles resulting in less operating costs. · The volume of rock cutting involved for already notified alignment is 6.76 lakhs cu. m. But, whereas the rock cutting for the proposed one is only 58,000 cu.m. This has consequences on cost and time for execution of the project. · Extra land acquisition is required for the notified alignment because of cutting to a tune of 18 M and Embankment of the heights of about 8 M. this is completely avoided in the suggested alignment. The Alignment Committee’ observations on the Western Sector Alignment: The alignment committee agreed with the inspection report of earlier committee and felt that there is a need to realign the ORR in this sector in compliance to the APPCB recommendations. The committee examined the possibility of avoiding the catchment area completely. However, in view developments coming up in the HI-Tech city area outside the catchment make it impossible to provide sufficient corridor in this area. Further, all the three options considered earlier are fret with technical and environmental problems. Accordingly, the committee proposed a new alignment, passing through the valley portion between Kokapeta and Vattinagulapally hillocks, outside the catchment area of Osman Sagar and shifting upward, away from the Osman Sagar tank, within the catchment area. Thereafter, the alignment passes through the foothills of Poppulguda village, avoiding the hilly section in the notified alignment. The alignment was taken as per the NSS report, which opined that it is not possible to construct the ORR of required design standards through the rocky section in the notified alignment. This alignment solves the technical problems by avoiding the hilly terrain and also complies with the recommendations of the Pollution Control Board, by shifting away from the tank to a distance of 2 – 3 kms. However, the Committee recommended that DPR consultants should properly design the section of road falling in the catchment area, so as to avoid any obstruction to water flow into the tanks. The Committee discussed all the options presented and decided that the final proposal is the best alternative as it avoids all the problems of other options and is in conformity with the recommendations of the Pollution Control Board. The distinctive advantages are: · The alignment passes through the valley portion of Kokapet and Vattinagulapally hillock. o Eliminating the need for cutting rocks – protecting the rocks and natural escape of the area. o Financially the cost of building 8-lane road is substantially reduced. · The alignment further avoids all water bodies in the area – as it is an environmentally sensitive area, there is a need to protect all water bodies. · The alignment further avoids all important development projects coming up in the area – As IT center numbers of projects were affected in other alternatives. · Cost of land acquisition is substantially lesser in this alignment – The experts’ committee opined that this particular alignment yields net savings of Rs.40 crores in terms of land acquisition savings and design. · The alignment is 4 -5 km. away from the Osman Sagar and covers minimal distance in the catchment. Therefore, the committee agreed for this alignment. The committee also recommended that savings in the project should be utilized for conservation of the catchment area by taking up green belt along the corridor and also designing the ORR so as to further reinforce water inflows to the tank.” The State Government approved the report of the Alignment Committee and issued G.O.Ms.No.8, dated 12.12.2005 whereby the Project Director and Special Collector, Land Acquisition, Outer Ring Road Project (respondent No.3 herein) was permitted to notify the final alignment of the ORR. The Facts: For the sake of convenience, we have taken the facts from the record of Writ Petition No.22809 of 2006. Petitioners – M/s.Jayabheri Properties Pvt. Ltd. and eight others purchased various parcels of land (total measuring Ac.29-28 gts.) in Survey Nos. 176, 189, 190, 191, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 and 202 and their sub-divisions in Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District by different registered sale-deeds dated 11.2.2004, 25.2.2004, 6.10.2004, 8.10.2004, 13.10.2004, 4.2.2005, 28.2.2005 and 6.4.2005. Respondent No.3, in exercise of the power delegated to him, issued Notification No.ORR/1098/2005, dated 13.12.2005 in Form-2-A under Section 4 (1) of the 1894 Act for acquisition of Ac.31-33 gts. of land for a public purpose i.e. formation of the ORR. First two paragraphs of that notification are extracted below: “THE ANDHRA PRADESH GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY O.R.R.No.87 HYDERABAD Thursday, 21st April 2005 No.C/121/2005 FORM 2 – A NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 (1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 Whereas it appears to the Government of Andhra Pradesh that the lands specified in the schedule below and situated in the Poppalguda village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District are need for a public purpose, to wit, for formation of Outer Ring Road. Notice to that effect is hereby given to all whom it may concern in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act 1 of 1894); as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 38 of 1923 and the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act of 1984. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the said Act, the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby authorizes the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquistiion, Unit – VII, Outer Ring Road, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad, his staff and workmen, to exercise the powers conferred by the said sub-section and under clause (c) of Section 3 of the said Act, the Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby appoints the Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), Unit- VII, Outer Ring Road, HUDA, Hyderabad to perform the functions of a Collector under Section 5-A of the said Act. … … … … … … Sd/- PEEYUSH KUMAR, IAS, Project Director & Special Collector (L.A.) Outer Ring Road Project, HUDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.” Since the above reproduced notification covered major portions of the land purchased by the petitioners in Survey Nos. 176, 189, 190, 191, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201 and 202, they filed objections on 12.1.2006. Respondent No.3 issued notice dated 12.7.2006 and fixed 17.7.2006 as the date of enquiry under Section 5-A of the 1894 Act. The petitioners appeared through their advocate and filed documents. The arguments were heard on 21.7.2006. Thereafter, draft declaration dated 29.7.2006 was issued under Section 6 and the same was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette Extra-Ordinary of the same date. The relevant portion of the draft declaration is also extracted below: “FORM 5 – A DRAFT DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT Under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Government of Andhra Pradesh hereby declare that the lands specified in the schedule below situated at Narsingi Village of Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and measuring Ac.23-23 gts. be the same a little more or less, is needed for a public purpose, to wit, for formation of Outer Ring Road. Under Section 3 and 7 of the Act, the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Unit-VII, Outer Ring Road Projecdt, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Tarnaka, Hyderabad is appointed to perform the functions of the Collector under the Act and directed to take order for the acquisition of the said land. A plan of the land is kept in the Office of the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit-II, Outer Ring Road Project, HUDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad and may be inspected at any time during office hours.” … … … PEEYUSH KUMAR, I.A.S. Project Director, Outer Ring Road, & Special Collector (L.A.), HUDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad.” The petitioners filed writ petition sometime in the month of October 2006 and questioned the acquisition of their land by making the following assertions: 1) that after undertaking detailed survey, respondent No.3 issued notifications dated 21.4.2005 under Section 4 (1) of the 1894 Act for acquisition of various extents of land in different villages for the purpose of formation and laying of ORR around the cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and Ranga Reddy District; 2) that the aforementioned notifications were issued keeping in view the scientific alignment of the road, the nature of land i.e. whether the land was plain or with undulations, hillocks, rocks etc., availability of government land and suitability of the land proposed to be acquired; 3) that the proposed acquisition did not cover the land of Narsingi village; 4) that with a view to benefit some influential persons, whose land would have been covered by the original alignment of the road, respondent No.3 and others arbitrarily manipulated the change of alignment and issued notification dated 13.12.2005; 5) that the land covered by Survey No.291 is earmarked as a water body and Survey No.292 is a greenbelt touching the water body; 6) that they filed several objections against the proposed acquisition of land, but without considering the same, respondent No.4 arbitrarily recommended finalization of the acquisition and respondent No.3 mechanically approved those recommendations, and 7) that the report of Alignment Committee and papers pertaining to the change of alignment were not supplied to them despite an application made under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioners further averred that with a view to save the lands belonging to men in power, the ruling party leaders, their relatives, well-wishers and kith and kin and to include the land belonging to political enemies of the ruling party, the alignment of ORR had been changed without any proper survey and scientific analysis. They claimed that the revised alignment would convert the straight road into a serpentine road and would defeat the very purpose of the project. For better appreciation of the grievance of the petitioners, paragraphs 27, 32, 33 and 34 of the affidavit of Shri Kishore Duggirala (petitioner No.3) are reproduced below: 27. I respectfully submit that the acquisition of lands belonging to us under the guise of changed alignment is highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of constitutional provisions and further the alignment of the Outer Ring Road from time to time arbitrarily changed, twisted and turned as