Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bobba Nageswara Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 8 July, 2019
Author: U.Durga Prasad Rao
Bench: U. Durga Prasad Rao
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7079 OF 2019
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings of respondent No.3 in Roc.No.189/2019(A), dated 15.05.2019, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013 (for short 'RFCTLARR Act', 2013) and for a consequential direction to set aside the impugned notice.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Irrigation representing respondent No.1 and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition representing respondent Nos.2 and 3.
3. The submission on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner is that, in view of the directions contained in batch W.P.Nos.44825 of 2017 and 6665 and 6699 of 2018, dated 12.03.2018, the respondent authorities instead of referring the matter to a competent authority as per Section 64 of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, issued the impugned notice directing the petitioner to attend before respondent No.3 with the record showing ownership of the petitioner in respect of the acquired lands and the said notice is contrary to the directions contained in the Order in batch W.P.Nos.44825 of 2017 and 6665 and 6699 of 2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus prayed to set aside the 2 impugned notice and directing the authorities to refer the matter to the competent authority.
4. The Order dated 12.03.2018 in batch W.P.Nos.44825 of 2017 and 6665 and 6699 of 2018 of this Court reads thus;
"Hence, the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the respondent Land Acquisition Officer to deposit the entire amount of compensation, before the Authority, in terms of Section 77 of the Act and further, refer the dispute to the authority notified under Section 64 of the Act, who shall deal with the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs".
5. Be that it may, respondent No.3 issued notice dated 15.05.2019 directing the petitioner to produce the records showing his ownership in respect of Survey No.5 on 17.05.2019, without fail for enquiry. In the considered view of this Court, this notice is contrary to the directions in the order in batch W.P.Nos.44825 of 2017 and 6665 and 6699 of 2018 wherein it was clearly ordered that the Land Acquisition Officer shall deposit the entire amount of compensation in terms of Section 77 of the Act and to refer the dispute to the authority notified under Section 64 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, who shall deal with the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
7. Therefore, this impugned notice dated 15.05.2019 is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside and the respondent No.3 is directed to refer the dispute to the authority notified under Section 64 of the RFCTLARR Act', 2013, within two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
3
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 08.07.2019.
MS 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO WRIT PETITION No.7079 OF 2019 Date. 08.07.2019 MS