‘Fairness extends to compensation’: Telangana High Court orders to review claims of landless Karimnagar farmers

It added, “The concept of fairness in this context is not confined merely to the issuance of notifications or passing of awards, but extends to the entire process, including determination and disbursement of compensation and consideration of claims raised by the affected persons.”

Decades-old grievance over LMD project

• The observations came in a writ petition filed in 2019 by Yava Narsaiah and others, who were assigned agricultural lands in Ganneruvaram village of Karimnagar district.
• The lands were acquired in the early 1980s for the Lower Manair Dam (LMD) reservoir project, with notifications issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award passed on July 13, 1983.
• While compensation was paid to the private patta landowners, the petitioners alleged that assigned lands were either excluded or not compensated on par, depriving them of their sole source of livelihood.
• The petitioners challenged the inaction of officials in failing to consider their representations dated October 25, 2017 and June 27, 2018, and sought directions to grant them compensation in accordance with their entitlement for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the Lower Manair Dam project.
• The petitioners contended before the Telangana High Court that despite submitting representations on October 25, 2017, and June 27, 2018, seeking compensation on par with patta landowners, authorities failed to take any decision.
• Their counsel argued that the law is well settled that assignees are entitled to full market value and statutory benefits, and that continued inaction by authorities amounted to a denial of lawful entitlement.

State’s defence: Delay, prior disbursement

The Telangana government opposed the plea, stating that compensation and ex gratia had already been processed through subsequent awards, including 1985 and 1990–91 proceedings. It said that certain payments were disbursed to beneficiaries.

The state submitted that the writ petition, filed decades later, was barred by delay and laches, relying on Supreme Court precedents.

Court: Consideration of claims integral to fairness

• The Telangana High Court, however, held that the petitioners’ grievance was not a challenge to the acquisition itself but to the non-consideration of their compensation claims.
• It said that fairness under Article 300A is not limited to procedural compliance in acquisition, but extends to ensuring that claims of affected persons are duly examined and decided through reasoned orders.
• Consideration of a representation is not “an empty formality”, the court noted, adding that failure to do so results in arbitrariness and violates constitutional guarantees.

Liberal approach for vulnerable groups

While acknowledging the principle that delayed challenges to acquisition are generally not entertained, the Telangana High Court carved out an important distinction.

It held that in cases involving economically weaker or illiterate persons, particularly where the grievance concerns non-payment of compensation, courts may adopt a liberal approach, and technical grounds like delay should not defeat substantive rights.

Directions issued

• Disposing of the writ petition, the Telangana High Court directed the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, Karimnagar to consider the petitioners’ representations dated October 25, 2017, and June 27, 2018.
• A reasoned decision must be taken within three months.
• The outcome must be communicated to the petitioners.
• The Telangana High Court clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the compensation claim, leaving all issues open for determination.