Uttam Chand Jain V. Union of India

WP/8839/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Uttam Chand Jain, the petitioner, who sought judicial intervention to address the non-release of compensation for land acquired under the National Highway Act, 1956, by the respondents, which included the Union of India and the National Highways Authority of India. The petitioner contested the action of the 3rd respondent, the Competent Authority-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, for not releasing the compensation as per a previous order and for insisting on the deduction of income tax (TDS) from the compensation amount. The High Court's decision focused on ensuring that the petitioner's representation was considered promptly and in accordance with the law.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 745472 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, National Highway Act, 1956
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: NAMAVARAPU RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: C RAGHU
• Keywords: Compensation; Income tax deduction; Land Acquisition; Writ of Mandamus
• Section: 3A

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEN/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 8839 OF 2020 Between: Uttam Chand Jain, S/o Mangilal Jain, Aged about 59 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.6-1-268, Khairthabad, Hyderabad, Telangana. ...pETtTtONER AND 1. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary lt4inistry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi. 2. National High Way Authorities of lndia, (Ministry of Road Transport and Highways), Rep. by Project Director, Plot.No.65,Kotari Layout, Venkatesh Nagar, Gulburga. 3. The Competent Authority-cu-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, Sangareddy District, Telangana. 4. Arbitrator-Cum-District Collector, Medak at Sangareddy, Sangareddy district. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of I ,4andamus, or any other appropriate writ, order declaring the action of the 3'd respondent in not releasing the compensation amount covered under the order passed by the 4th respondent in Appeal No.Gl1144512015-17, dated 24.9.2016 and rnsisting for deducting income tax (TDS) in relation to Ac. 1.20 gts in Sy.No.57 of Zaheerabad Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District acqulred by the respondents vide notification dated 31 .3.2012 under Sec.3A of the National Highway Act. 1956 as illegal and arbitrary and further direct the 3rd respondent to immediately release the amount without deducting the income tax (TDS) along with the interest on the enhanced amount @15 ok and the unpaid arrest of interest. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim direction directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation, dated 14.5.2020 made by the petitioner in respect of the compensation to be received in relation to Ac.1 .20 gts in Sy.No.57 of Zaheerabad Village & mandal, Sangareddy District, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. C. RAGHU Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRl. NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: Gp FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY W.P.No.8839 o12020 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 3'd respondent in not releasing the compensation to the petitioner with respect to the acquired land to an extent of Ac.1.20 gts in Sy.No.57 of Zaheerabad Village and Mandal, Sangareddy District, as per the order passed by the 4th respondent in Appeal No.G1/1455/2015-17 daled 24.09.2016 and insisting for deduction of income tax (TDS), as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondents. 3. Though the petitioner has raised several grounds in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the representation dated 14.05.2020 of the petitioner is pending before the 3'd respondent, a direction may be given to the 3'd respondent to dispose of the same. He also submits that the respondents are not entitled to deduct income tax (TDS) from the compensation amount' 4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submits that the representation of the petitioner will be considered by the 3'd respondent in accordance with law. 5. lnasmuch as the petitioner's representation dated 14'05'2020 is pending before the 3'd respondent' it would be appropriate to direct the 3'd respondent to consider the representation dated 14.05.2020 of the petitioner in accordance with law, within a 2 ARR. J W.P.No.8839 of 2020 period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. With the above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-K.SAIL ASSISTANT REG SECTI OFFICER To, 1. 2. .). 4. A CHR The Competent Authority-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy, Sangareddy District, Telangana. One CC to Sri C. Raghu Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri. Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, Assistant Solicitor General [OPUC] Two CCs to the GP for Land Acquisition, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. (OUT) Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:01 10912020 ORDER W.P.No.8839 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ),o>'o l5 0I SEP2m0 I "