IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9250 of 2003 Between: 1 Thotu Ramchandram S/o. Thirupathi R/o. H.No. 2-1-132, Jawahar Road, Jagtial, Karimnagar District 2 Bandarapu Bhagya W/o. Parashuramulu R/o. H.No. 1-6-6 to 1-6-9, Jawahar Road, Jagtial, District Karimnagar ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Chief Engineer, National High Way & Surface Transport, Hyderabad. Opp: Medinova, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Karimnagar. Karimnagar District. 3 The Superintending Engineer, Roads & Buildings, Karimnagar, Public Works Department, Karimnagar 4 The Municipality, Jagitial, rep. by its Commissioner Office of Municipality, Jagtial, Karimnagar District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in demolishing the houses of the petitioners existing on Jawahar Road, in Jagtial Town proper, Karimnagar District without acquiring the property under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, and paying compensation thereof in the process of widening of existing Jawahar Road, Jagtial Town proper in Karimnagar District i.e.; from New Bus Stand circle to the house of Ashalu, former Chairman, Municipality, Jagtial to 100' wide for construction of 3.5 metre width divider, providing center Lighting System pursuant to the tender notification No.MCJ/ME/2003-04/1 dated 1-4- 2003 in as bad, illegal, arbitrary apart from the same being opposed to principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14,19,21 of Constitution of India and to set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAMESH SAGAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.VISWANATHAM The Court made the following : ORDER: Petitioner No.1 Thotu Ramchandram is the owner of the house bearing No.2-1-132 situated on Jawahar Road, Jagtial. Whereas, minor sons of the 2nd petitioner Bandarapu Bhagya viz., Satish Kumar and Suraj are the owners of the houses bearing Nos.1-6-6 to 1-6-9 situated on Jawahar Road, Jagtial. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the respondents are trying to demolish a portion of their houses in road widening without following the due process of law. According to the petitioners, there is no need to widen the existing Jawahar Road to 100’ and to construct the divider of 3.5 metre applicable to maintenance of National Highway. For better understanding the grievance of the petitioner, paras.3 and 4 of the writ affidavit need to be noted and they are thus: “3. That, I submit that, it appears that the 4th respondent intends to widen the existing road of 80’ from New Bus Stand Circle to the house of former Municipal Chairman Ashalu, to 100’ though no such road has been approved by any State Authority. The Government have issued G.O.Ms.No.149 dt.23.03.1989 Municipal Administration Department for implementation of Master Plan in Jagtial Town on settlement with the owners of the houses on either side of the road and on compromise basis. As per the said Government Order, the width of Jawahar Road should be maintained at 60’, 70’ & 80’ within the Municipal limits and 100’ beyond Municipal limits. The houses of the petitioners are within the road alignment and margin and there are no constructions by way of encroachment on the set back area also. Subsequently, the Central Government have taken over some roads in various parts in the State including Jawahar Road in Jagtial as National High Ways. The Jawahar Road therefore, has come under National High Way-16. But the authorities of 1st respondent, instead of widening the existing Jawahar road to 100’ to the structure of National High Way and construct the road divider to the width of 3.5 Metre and in order to avoid the demolition of several houses and payment of huge compensation to the owners of the houses, have decided to construct new by-pass road has been sanctioned. Therefore, the authorities of 1st respondent have abandoned the idea of widening the road to a width of 100’ within Municipal limits. In view of the said fact, there is no need to widen the existing Jawahar Road to 100’ and to construct the divider of 3.5 metre applicable to maintenance of National High Way. 4. That, I submit that the dividers shall be constructed for other roads in the State depending on the need and necessity, to regulate and control traffic. The width of the divider shall be one foot or single row line divider. The 4th respondent, it appears has passed resolution in proceeding No.799/C1/2002 on 28.09.2002 for widening of roads within the limits of Municipality against the Master plan. The agenda No.5 of the said proceedings relates to the widening of Jawahar Road from New Bus Stand Circle to the house of Ashalu to 100’, to construct the divider for making the provision of arranging center lighting system. The length of the said piece of road is 15 K.Ms. The 4th respondent has invited quotations for survey and demarcate the roads for constructing the center lighting system from various contractors. It appears three contractors namely M/s.Sunlink Info Systems, Hyderbad; Hugo Miraj Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd; and G.Omtech Consultancy, Hyderabad have submitted their quotations. The quotation submitted by G.Om-Tech Consultancy being found to be less and as such the survey and demark work has been entrusted to the said contractor.” 2. Rule Nisi came to be issued on 13.03.2003. 3rd respondent filed counter-affidavit. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that there is no proposal to widen the existing road. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the respondents are contemplating to widen the road demolishing the part of the houses owned by the petitioners without following the due process of law. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to follow the due process of law in the event of the houses of the petitioners are required to be demolished for the purpose of road widening. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:12th June, 2009. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}