Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bathina Narasimhulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 February, 2022
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.20954 OF 2018
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue an order or direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not paying the compensation to the land trees and structures existed in survey numbers i.e Sy. No 369 of 3 an extent of Ac. 0.93 cents, Sy. No. 370 an extent of Ac. 3.03 cents, Sy. No. 371 an extent of Ac. 2.48 cents, Sy. No. 371/2 an extent of Ac. 1.28 cents, Sy. No. 372/2 an extent of Ac. 0.90 cents, Sy. No. 373/3B an extent of Ac. 1.73 cents, Sy.No. 377/4 an extent of Ac. 1.84 cents of Chanduvai village, Atluru Mandal, Kadapa District as highly arbitrary, illegal, null and void against the Principles of Natural Justice and violative of Fundamental Rights apart from Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents authorities .."
2. The petitioners' case in nut shell is that the residents of Bedusupalli H/o Chanduvai villag, Atluru Mandal, Kadapa District, which is one of the submerged village under foreshore submersion of Somasila Project. The Government of Andhra Pradesh/ the 1st respondent herein published a Notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1971 on 30.04.1992 in daily news paper proposing to acquire the property of the petitioner and place of habitation in Chanduvai village, Atluru Mandal, Kadapa District. The Notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act discloses that Ac.56.73 cents is proposed to be acquired, but the authorities have not passed an award for the entire extent and an extent of Ac.22.71 cents was shown in the award as land in Reach No. 7-B; whereas in respect of the remaining land Ac.34.02 cents treated as D-form patta land and as such neither award was passed for the said land nor any proceedings were issued resuming the said land to the Government. The 2 respondent authorities have not evincing any interest for payment of compensation or ex gratia.
3. Thereupon, the petitioners got issued a legal notice dated 05.05.2018 demanding the authorities for payment of compensation on par with other patta land owners, but respondent authority did not pass any order for payment of compensation or ex gratia.
4. As per new enactment called as A.P. Dotted Lands updation in Resettlement Register Act 2017, if a person, who is in continuous possession and enjoyment of land for a period of 12 year, prior to commencement of the Act, is entitled for updation of his name in form-16 of RSR in respect of the Dotted land. The said land was not assigned land. The respondent authorities have treated the land as DKT land only on the ground that the resurvey and resettlement register of the said land shows dots in the ownership column-16. Hence, the authorities did not pay either compensation or ex gratia and such inaction was questioned in this petition and sought a direction as stated above.
5. The Special Deputy Collector filed counter-affidavit admitting about issuance of Notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act and passing an Award for an extent of Ac.22.71 cents which is private patta land while declining to pass an award for an extent of Ac.34.02 cents treating it as D- form patta land, as such, no award was passed resuming the 3 land, invoking clause 17 of the DKT patta. The respondent also admitted that the petitioners are not original assignees as per the entries in column No.16 of RSR. These are dotted lands and donated in favour of DC men. Hence, these land is DKT land. The then Special Deputy Collector, LATGT Unit-1, Kadapa while submitting ex gratia proposals vide office reference No. C/49/02 dated 11.02.2004 reported that he inspected the land along with the Special Deputy Tahsildar, Special Revenue Inspector and Special Surveyor and furnished the details of the structures existing on the DKT land, vide report dated 16.01.2004, submitted for approval and it is pending and at the end of the counter, they admitted about pendency of the proposal; but in additional-counter dated 25.07.2019, at para No.7, the respondents specifically stated that they agreed to pay compensation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.259 dated 21.06.2016.
6. In view of these specific contentions urged by the respondent No.4 in the counter and the additional counter, the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Balaji Medamalli requested to issue a direction for payment of compensation in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 259 dated 21.06.2016.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue readily agreed to pay compensation in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 259 dated 21.06.2016 subject to grant of reasonable time for payment.
8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners Balaji Medamalli and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, no further 4 adjudication is required in the matter and suffice to issue a direction to the respondent No.4 to pay compensation in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 259 dated 21.06.2016 within a period of eight (8) weeks from today.
8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 07.02.2022 psr 5 144 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.20954 OF 2018 Date: 07.02.2022 Psr.