Live
- Situation in Har opposite of exit poll prediction: Ilmi
- An unbroken night’s sleep is a myth
- SVIMS set for major expansion to provide holistic healthcare
- J&K BJP chief Raina loses Nowshera to NC
- Biggest lesson from Haryana is never be overconfident: Kejriwal
- CM rolls out plan to make drains in ORR limits clean
- AAP opens account in Jammu & Kashmir
- Maliwal slams AAP for betraying INDIA, splitting Congress votes
- HP’s floral tribute at Vaishno Devi, Brajeshwari Devi shrines
- MyVoice: Views of our readers 9th October 2024
HC nixes acquisition of land under GO 123
In a major setback to the Telangana state government, the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad has ruled that the government can no longer purchase lands under the controversial G.O.MS.No.123 for the public purpose of construction of irrigation projects as “it would deny the marginalised sections of society, who are dependent upon these lands of the land owners for their survival, of the rights c
Hyderabad: In a major setback to the Telangana state government, the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad has ruled that the government can no longer purchase lands under the controversial G.O.MS.No.123 for the public purpose of construction of irrigation projects as “it would deny the marginalised sections of society, who are dependent upon these lands of the land owners for their survival, of the rights conferred on them by the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.”
The division bench, comprising of Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice U Durga Prasad, pronounced an interim judgment on Thursday through a common order on a batch of writ petitions challenging the G.O. MS No. 123.
Even as the State government had been stopped from procuring lands under the said G.O. from now onwards, the High Court made it clear that its order shall not preclude the government from acquiring lands under the 2013 Act on complying with the conditions stipulated therein for rehabilitation and resettlement of all the affected families.
The judgment of the High Court comes in the wake of a very contentious process of land procurement/acquisition undertaken by the State government for its prestigious irrigation projects, particularly Mallanasagar Reservoir project under the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project and the Palamuru-Ranga Reddy Lift Irrigation Project.
Many land owners and those depending on land knocked on the doors of the High Court challenging the validity of G.O. MS No. 123.
A single judge of the High Court had quashed the G.O. as ultra vires of the 2013 Act and, when the State government filed a writ appeal, a stay was granted on the single judge’s order by the division bench. With the latest judgment, the operation of the controversial G.O., in so far as land procurement for irrigation projects, has been halted.
The High Court observed in its judgment that the rights conferred under the 2013 Act, in favour of the affected families (other than land owners), such as village artisans, agricultural labourers, forest dwellers, Scheduled Tribes, assignees of Government land etc. would be defeated if the State government is allowed to purchase lands from willing land owners for irrigation projects under G.O. 123. It made it clear that the rights of these deprived sections cannot be violated by the State.
Taking note of the G.O.MS.No.190 brought by the government to provide Schedule II benefits of Rehabilitation and Resettlement to non-land owners, the Court felt it does not prescribe a satisfactory procedure, much less a procedure which is more beneficial than what is provided under the 2013 Act, to identify those who are entitled to, and to provide them, the rehabilitation and resettlement benefits stipulated under the 2013 Act.
It also noted that the said G.O. 190 does not obligate the State to provide the infrastructural facilities prescribed in the Third Schedule to the 2013 Act.
On the status of already registered sale deeds under G.O. MS No 123, the judgment made it clear that the validity of those deeds would be decided during the final hearing of the main writ petitions.
“Contracts entered into by the State under G.O.Ms.No.123 dated 30.07.2015, prima facie, violate Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act.
While the question as to whether such of these contracts already made are void ab initio can only be answered on the writ petitions being finally heard; we are satisfied that the State Government should not be permitted, hereinafter, to enter into contracts under G.O.Ms.No.123 dated 30.07.2015”.
