APHC010519412025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 26776/2025 Between: 1. MOHAMMAD MAQBUL, S/O RASOOL (LATE), AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O. 37-2-53, ISLAM PETA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 610, ROAD NO. 2, SAI NAGAR COLONY, ANNOJIGUDA, GHATKESAR, MEDCHAL, TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, ONGOLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE, OPP. CHURCH CENTER, ONGOLE. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 2 ORDER:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in marking the petitioner’s property admeasuring 12 square yards of land in T.S.No.185 along with a RCC Ground Floor structure, wherein the petitioner is running a shop bearing Door No.37-1-328(2) (Old Door No.37-1-326(2)), Assessment No. 1035002335. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pressurized by the 2nd respondent and their officers to accept the TDR certificates in return for handing over 12 square yards property for the purpose of road widening. It is submitted that the respondent authorities cannot force the petitioner to accept TDR bonds while acquiring the property belonging to the petitioner for public purposes. It is also submitted that the TDR bonds would not meet the requirements of the petitioner as an alternative to compensation for the land acquired. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the 2nd respondent would have to follow the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, in the event the respondent authorities intend to acquire any portion of the petitioner’s land for public purposes. 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the petitioner is issued a notice under Sections 145 and 146 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, and objections of the petitioner are called for, indicating that the petitioner would be issued TDR 3 bonds @1:4 which can be utilized by the petitioner or could be put to sale and liquidated subsequently. It is also submitted that the respondent authorities would follow the procedure contemplated under Sections 145 and 146 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and accordingly this writ petition can be disposed of by recording the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel that the respondent authorities shall follow the provisions of Chapter V of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 relating to acquisition of property. The Sections 145, 146 and 147 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 relate to the power and procedure for acquisition of immovable property. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent. 6. Section 146 deals with acquisition of immovable property by agreement. 7. Section 147 deals with procedure when immovable property cannot be acquired by agreement. 8. Section 145 empowers the Corporation to acquire any property on payment of compensation. 9. The insistence of the 2nd respondent in indicating the TDR bonds as an alternative for the land affected and required for public purpose would amount to coercive tactics of the respondent authorities. 10. In view of Section 147 of the Act of the Municipal Corporation, the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, would have to be essentially followed by the respondent authorities. It is always open to the 4 petitioner to accept the offer of TDR bonds. However, in cases where the landowners do not accept the TDR bonds offered by the respondent authorities, the respondent authorities would have to follow the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 11. On these considerations, the writ petition is disposed off directing the respondent authorities not to disturb the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner property without following due process of law, making it further clear that the respondent authorities shall have to follow the Act 30 of 13 while acquiring the land of the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 25.09.2025 PNS