Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has sought an explanation from the state revenue authorities and other metropolitan bodies over a dispute concerning land acquisition for a proposed greenfield radial poad project from the ORR at Meerkhanpet to the Regional Ring Road at Amangal in Rangareddy district.
Hearing a writ petition filed by Annepu Jangaiah along with 30 landowners, Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar directed notices to the principal secretaries of revenue and municipal administration and urban development departments, the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, and the Ranga Reddy district collector as well as the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority and the Hyderabad Growth Corridor Limited.
The petition challenged a land acquisition notification issued in late December 2024 for the development of a radial road intended to link the ORR with the proposed RRR by acquiring around 554.34 acres. The project covers a significant stretch passing through several villages, including Kurmidda, Kadthal, Mudwin and Amangal.
According to the petitioners, their land admeasuring over 61 acres, had been included in the acquisition process without following due procedure. They alleged that the authorities did not comply with mandatory provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, particularly those governing preliminary notification, hearing of objections, and determination of compensation.
A key grievance the petitioners raised was is that their objections to the acquisition were rejected without granting them a personal hearing, despite the fact that the “urgency clause” was not invoked. They also questioned the validity of subsequent proceedings and urged the court to quash the acquisition notification and declare the exercise unconstitutional.
Advocate-General A. Sudershan Reddy, appearing for state, submitted that out of the 554.34 acres being acquired, only around 200 acres were in dispute and compensation was awarded to properties located in 26 acres. Urging the court to not stay the land acquisition proceedings, the A-G submitted that the court may take an undertaking from the government that the petitioners shall not be dispossessed of their land till a compensation award was passed. Recording the submissions, the court posted the matter for further hearing.