LexM/S. JAYABHERI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 4 S.C.R. 75
M/S. JAYABHERI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
v.
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 52 of 2008)
APRIL 05, 2010
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.]
A
B
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: s. 5A - Land required for
construction of Outer Ring Road (ORR) for the twin cities of
Hyderabad and Secunderabad - ORR alignment finalised -
C
Acquisition notification - Representations for change of ORR
alignment on the ground that land situated in the said
alignment comprised of water bodies - Alternative alignment
suggested - Accordingly notification issued for acquiring land
in Narsingi Village and Poppalguda Village - Challenged by· D
appellants-land-owners - Held: The reports of local authorities
stated that the first alignment involved ·considerable amount
of rock cutting which was not so, as far as the second
alignment was concerned - That apart, major stretch of the
Outer Ring Road had already been completed - Only a small
E
stretch involving plots of appellants, was yet to be completed
- In such situation, public interest would out-weigh the interest
of the individual plot holders -
However, concerned
authorities directed to take maximum care to preserve as far
as possible the water bodies over which the road is to be
F
constructed - Environmental law - Urban development.
The State required land for the purpose of Outer Ring
Road {ORR) project for the twin cities of Hyderabad and
Secunderabad. The ORR alignment was finalised in April
2005 providing for 159 Km. road around the twin cities
G
and Ranga Reddy district. Notification was issued for
acquisition of various lands. Since the alignment of
Western sector was through Poppalguda and other
villages
which
comprised
of
water
bodies,
75
H
76
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2010] 4 S.C.R.
A representations were made for change of said alignment.
On inspection, the technical wing of ORR project felt that
the alignment involved rock cutting, which was highly
uneconomical and also affecting a water body and school
building. An alternative alignment was suggested by the
B Committee. The Alignment Committee recommended that
the notified Western Alignment joining Phase I at
Poppalguda Village was not advisable and an alignment
passing through Narsingi Village would lessen the
expenses for cutting through rock forming part of
c proposed alignment. The Alignment Committee also
observed that the new alignment avoided all water bodies
in the area which was an ecologically sensitive area with
a need to protect all water bodies. The new alignment
was finalised. On 13.12.2002, a Notification was issued
0 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for
acquiring the land belonging to the appellants situated
at Narsingi Village and at Poppalguda Village. Objections
were filed under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 that there was a water body in the impugned
E alignment. The objections were rejected and on 29.7.2006,
a draft declaration was published under Section 6 of the
Act. The writ petitions challenging the acquisition
proceedings were dismissed. Hence these appeals. The
Director of the Centre for Environmental studies filed an
interlocutory application for intervention challenging the
F alignment on account of the fact that the hydrological
system in the area would be destroyed if Western Sector
of the project was allowed.
Disposing of the appeals and interlocutory
G application, the Court
HELD: 1. From the site plans of the area submitted
by the parties, it is clear that both the two alignments
touch and disturb existing water bodies, which was the
H main ground for the change of alignment in the first
JAYABHERI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS. v.
77
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
place. The reports submitted by the various local A
authorities stated, that in order to proceed according to
the first alignment, the respondents had to cut through
a great deal of rock, which was not so as far as the
second alignment was concerned. In terms of the
environmental policies of the State Government, the B
Western Sector of the project is shown to be a highly
ecologically sensitive zone, but there was no choice but
to consider the viability of either of the two alignments
for the purpose of the connectivity of the Outer Ring Road
and while doing so the said factor and also the interest c
of the private land owners as against the interest of the
public has to be balanceExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.