MUNIYAPPA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have a short grievance as to non- consideration of their representation dated 23.01.2015 at Annexure-Q wherein they have sought for compensation in respect of their land that has been utilized by the second respondent - DRDO without resorting to due acquisition process.

(2.) The respondents having entered appearance through their counsel resisted the writ petitions on the ground that the petitioners have not furnished necessary material particulars and the documents supporting their claim as to the ownership of the land in question.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the first round of litigation in W.P. Nos.14265/2011 and 18240/2011, this Court vide judgment dated 13.04.2012, a copy whereof is at Annexure-G has directed the respondents to identify and ascertain whether the land of the petitioners was utilized by the second respondent, after conducting a due survey; accordingly, the survey was conducted and it was discovered that petitioners' land was appropriated by the second respondent sans acquisition process.