Talasani Sravan Reddy v. The Union of India
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: APARESH KUMAR SINGH,G.M. MOHIUDDIN
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-24. Talasani Sravan Reddy v. The Union of India. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3488 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRt APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE G. M. MOHIUDDTN WRIT APPEAL NO: 474 OF 2026 writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Against the order Dated 09-04-2026 in w. P. No 111s2 of 2023 on the fite of ffre i]gn court. Between: Talasani sravan Reddy, s/o. Talasani sekhara Reddy, aged about 3g years, R/o. Kalvakurthy village and Mandal, Nagar Kurnool oirtri. t. I j I "'APPELLANT AND li 1. The Union of lndia, Ministry ,l of Roads, rep. by its Regional ! , officer, Transport -Complex, and Highways, Regional Office, R and'B fiuitding gira' traanzil, Hyderabad 2. The Engineer- in -chief, (Roads and Buirdings), National Highways, cRF . Building, Hyderabad. 3. The Nationar Highway Authority of rndia, rep. by its chairperson, sector _10, Dwaraka, New Delhi. 4.
The Revenue Divisional Officer-Competent Authority, Kalvakurthy Division, Nagarkumool District ... RESPONDENTS l. A. NO: 2 OF 202G Petition under Section 151 CPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to utilize/consume the land of the petitioner i. e. ,25 guntas from out of Ac. 1-00 in Sy. No. 509 of Kotrasivar village, Veldanda Mandal, Nagarkurnool District for the purpose of Kalwakurthy Bypass road on NH-167K, pending disposal of the appeal. l. A. NO: 1 Ol= 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operatiorr and effect of the order passed in l. A. No. 1 of 2024 in W. P. No. 11752 of 2}23,dated r)9. 04. 2026, pending disposat of the appeal. c o u n s e I f o r t h e Ap Re I I a nt :,tfi,tY,. BxhlJfix5fl1ffi counser for the Respondent No.
l '3}::,t#iH3*5t? i"*, Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SRI P. HARINATH GUPTA Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 : Counsel for Respondent No. 4 : SRI E. RAMESH CHANDRA GOUD, GP FOR LA The Court nrade the following: JUDGMENT TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. M. MOHRJDDIN WRIT APPEAL No. 474 of 2026 Dated: 24. 04. 2026 Between: Talasani Sravan Reddy ... Appellant and The Union of lndia, Ministry of Roads, Rep. by its Regional Ofhcer, Transport and l{ighways, Regional Office, R&B Building Complex, Erra Manzil, Hyderabad, and 3 others. ... Respondents JUDGMENT Learned Senior Counsel Sri Vedula Venkataramana, representing lWs. Bharadwaj Associates, appears for the appellant. Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of lndia, t I I appears for respondent No. l I Lt:arned counsel Sri p. Harinath Gupta appears for respondent No. 2. Sri E.
Ramesh chandra Goud, learned Government pleader for Land Acrluisition, appears for respondent No. 4. 2. Hr:ard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The present appeal arises out of the interim order dated 09. 04. 20'. 26 passed by the learned wrir court in I. A. No. l of 2024 in W. P. No. 11752 of 2023. 4- [n the writ petition preferred by the appeilant, apart from questioning the action of respondent No. 4 in not deciding the ob. jections of the alrpellanr dated 17. 10. 2022 in respect of the acquisition to be made by the notification under Section 34 of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred .. the to as, Act"), dated 01. 09. 2022. towards construction of Kalwakurthy bypass road and issuing final notificaticn under Section 3D of the Act by including the land of the appellant in Survey No. 509 of Kotrasi'ar Village, Veldanda Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, as arbitrary and illegal, the appelrant also prayed 1 \ \ for an inlerim relief in I. A. No.
I of 2023 to direct the respondents not to utilise/consume the rand of the appeilant i. e. ,25 guntas from out of one acre in Survey No. 509 of Kotrasivar Village, Veldanda Mandal, Nagarkurnool District, for the puqpose of the Kalwakurthy bypass,road on NH- l67K pending disposal of the writ petition. 5. on 26. 04. 2023, the learned writ court, taking into consideration the fact that the endorsement was bereft of reasons and has not answered the objections raised by the appellant, granted interim direction as prayed for. The impugned interirn order dated 09. 04. 2026 has vacated the earlier interim order dated 26. 04. 2023 on the I. A. No. l of 2024 filed I by the respondent No. 4. on that day, the appellant was not represented. That has aggrieved the appellant to prefer this appeal. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of this court to the endorsement in File No. E/2682022, dated: -. 10.
2022, and subrnitted that though on receipt of objection petition, the appellant was served a notice to appear on 17. 10. 2022 for personal hearing, but his objections have not been dealt with while the National Highways Authority of India has proceeded to issue the notification under Section 3D of the Act. The learned writ court, however, on the instant occasion relying upon the decision of the Apex court in union of India v. , I Kushala shetfyt at paragraph 28, proceeded to vacate the interim orde) / (zot r) 12 ' scc 69 in the abs,:nce of the appellant, who ,y65 not represented on that sole duy. In the meantime, if the acquisition is given shape by construction of the road, the whole /ls would be rendered infructuous, as the appellant'r; land would be consumed in that process. This has compelled the appelknt to prefer this appeal. 7. LeeLrned Government pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent No. 4 and the learned counsel lor respondent No.
2 both objected t,r the prayer. They have also sought to draw the attention of this court to the endorsement dated 05. 12. 2022 which would rebut the case of th. e appellant i. e. , the objections have been dealt with by the competenr authority as per the scheme of the Act and the notification under section 3D of the Act has been issued. Upon issuance of the notification under section 3D of the Act, any declaration made by the central Gcvernment under Section 3D(l) of the Act cannot be called in question in any court or by any other authority. Therefore, the learned writ court has, taking note of the ratio rendered in the case of Kushala shetty (sr-rpra), rightly vacated the interim order, as the whole project would umecessarily be withheld. \ \ 8.
wr: have considered the subrnissions of the rearned counser for the parti*s and the rerevant material necessary to appreciate the ik challenge to the interim order impugned herein whereby the learned writ court vacated its earlier interim order. 9. We are conscious not to make any comments on the merits or the contentions of the parties, as the writ petition is pending adjudication on the cause of action raised by the appellant that without dealing with the I objections to the notification under Section 3,A. of the Act, the I respondents have proceeded to acquire the land by issuance of the I notif,rcation under Section 3D of the Act. I 10. [n the circumstances discussed above, we do not feel inclined to interfere in the impugned interim order dated 09. 04. 2026.
However, we are of the opinion that since the impugned interim order in the nature of vacation of the earlier interim order was passed on a date on which the appellant was not represented, perhaps inadvertently, it would be in the fitness of things that the appellant seeks modification or recall of the impugned interim order before the learned writ court and/or early hearing of the writ petition. If such an interlocutory application is filed by 27 . 04. 2026, the matter be posted on the said interlocutory application before the learned writ court on29. 04. 2026. The leamed writ court is requested to consider the prayer made in such interlocutory application / in accordance with law. Let it be made clear that this court has not gone into the m3rits of the case of the parties. Till 29 . 04. 2026, status quo as on date be maintained. I l. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of with the above said observations. l'here shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-MOHD. ISMAIL UE 6 SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Regiional officer, Union of rndia, Ministry of Roads, Transport and Highways, Regionar office, R andB Buirding comprex, pna' rraanzir, Hyderabad. 2. Engrineer-in-Chief, (Roads and ]he Buildings), National Highways, CRF Building, Hyderabad. 3. The National Hrghway Authority of India, rep. by its chairperson, sector -10, Dwaraka New Delhi. 4. The Revenue Divisional officer-competent Authority, Kalvakurthy Division, Nagarkurnool District 5. The secrion officer, posting section, High court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad. 6. section officer, writ Division Bench lhe section, High court for the state of Telangara, at Hyderabad. 7. secl:ion officer, writ r'ron-service fhg section, High court for the state of Telangara, at Hyderabad. 8. One CC lo M/S. BHARADWA. J ASSOCIATES, Advocate. tOpUCI 9. One CC to SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia, '.
'-'-' High ' "-'' Court for the State of Telangana at HyderabiO. 1OeUCl 10. Two ccs to cp FoR LAND AcQursrfloN, High court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 11. One CC Lo SRt P. HARINATH GUPTA, Advocate. tOpUCl 12. Two CD tlqp;g.. tw BSI(PMK ls HIGH COURT DATED: 2410412026 LrsT oN 2910412026 THE k ( '. ) U Z. 20 A 202[ JUDGMENT * * fr. - WA. No. 474 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOLIT COSTS \ I 14 6
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.