The notification issued by Telangana State government on September 29 for acquisition of land in Erravelli and Vemulaghat villages of Kondapaka and Thoguta mandals of Medak district for the Mallannasagar reservoir has opened another controversy, with petitions filed in the High Court questioning the legality of the notification.
It may be recalled that it has been the demand of the villagers for application of the ‘Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013’, rather than the GO 123 for land acquisition. Farmers have already approached the High Court over this, with the government filing an affidavit assuring that the Act will be applied to those who want it.
The latest notification, while mentioning the Act, invoked the ‘Urgency’ clause of its Section 40, and exempted the government from the requirements of social impact assessment as mandated by the Act otherwise.
Though unsaid in the notification, the government can also do away with the provision of Rehabilitation and Resettlement and other measures if the section is invoked.
Through the notification, the government sought to acquire 161 acres from Erravelli and 775 acres from Vemulaghat villages.
However, the Section 40, in its clauses, clearly mentions that such acquisition under ‘urgency’ is applicable only for “the defence of India or national security or for any emergencies arising out of natural calamities or any other emergency with the approval of Parliament”. Construction ‘Dr B.R. Ambedkar Pranahita Chevella Sujala Sravanti Project Reservoir’ as mentioned in the notification, does not match any of these criteria, contended the petitioners to the High Court.
Also mentioning the ongoing legal battles over the GO 123, and the clamp down on the villages for a prolonged period through Section 144, the petitioners, all from Vemulaghat village, said the Section 40 was invoked only with the intention of terrorising farmers into submission.
Further, the notification also suffers from another deficiency as per the Section 26(3) of the Act, which mandates revision of the market value of the land before initiating the land acquisition procedures. The land rates for the region have not been revised in a long time.
The main prayer was for the High Court to intervene and declare the notification as illegal, while the petitioners also prayed for interim orders issuing stay on all further proceedings of land acquisition initiated under the notification, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Another prayer was for orders to be issued for conducting of social impact assessment study and preparation of social impact management plan. Two petitions filed against the notification were clubbed, and the first hearing was held on last Thursday, when notices were issued to the state government for its response.
