Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The Special Collector La vs Duggasani Sailaja on 17 September, 2019
Author: C. Praveen Kumar
Bench: C.Praveen Kumar, M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT APPEAL No.245 of 2019
JUDGMENT:{Per Hon'ble the Acting Justice C. Praveen Kumar}
1. Assailing the order dated 17.8.2018 passed in W.P.No.36634 of 2017 by the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, wherein the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition directing the 3rd respondent-Special Deputy Collector (LA), PBC/MRC, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District, to re-determine the compensation payable to the petitioners as per Act 30 of 2013, taking the date of resumption i.e., 16.3.2015 as the date with reference to which such compensation and benefits are to be determined within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, and to give opportunity to the petitioners to file evidence of market value of their respective lands during the enquiry to be conducted by him as per the above directions, the present writ appeal came to be filed.
2. The circumstances which led to filing the above writ petition are that the writ petitioners are assignees of the subject lands, which were resumed by the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition for excavation of Mabbuchintalapalli tank vide proceedings dated 16.3.2015. Subsequently, vide proceedings dated 29.7.2017, exgratia was determined to be paid to the petitioners, but were not paid compensation on market value basis. Further, the other benefits to which they are entitled to, as per the decision in LAO-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella 2 HACJ & MSM,J W.A No.245/2019 Division, Domalguda, Hyderabad and others Vs. Mekhala Pandu and others1 were also not awarded. It is stated that G.O.Ms.No.259 Revenue (Assgn.I) Department, dated 21.6.2016 was issued by the State Government itself stating that compensation for resumed lands would be paid on par with the land owners as per Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) but the respondents have not followed the same.
3. A counter-affidavit came to be filed by the 3rd respondent- Special Deputy Collector stating that the Executive Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project Division No.1, Kadapa in Ref.No.297M, dated 4.8.2011 requisitioned for acquisition of Ac.78.01 cents at Velpula village, Vemula Mandal of Kadapa District for excavation of Mabbuchintalapalli Tank under Chitravati Balancing Reservoir and that the District Collector fixed market value of the lands proposed to be acquired; a draft consent award was passed and the awardees accepted the same agreeing not to challenge the same in a Court of law under Section 18 of the Act. It is further stated that as per condition No.10 of the assignment, there is no possibility to pay any compensation in cases where assigned lands are resumed for project purpose and the assignees cannot approach Court of law for further enhancement of any type of compensation.
4. The learned single Judge after considering the material on record, allowed the writ petition as stated supra. Challenging the same, the present writ appeal came to be filed reiterating the grounds urged in the counter-affidavit filed in the writ petition. 1 AIR 2004 (AP) 250 3 HACJ & MSM,J W.A No.245/2019
5. During the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition would contend that the subject lands are assigned lands and the benefits under the scheme have already been paid to the writ petitioners. It is further pleaded that since the subject lands are not private lands, the question of paying compensation, for the acquisition made would not arise and that the appellants followed the procedure prescribed for taking possession of the property in terms of the conditions of patta, and thereby, they are not liable to pay any compensation to the writ petitioners in terms of Mekala Pandu's case.
6. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondents- writ petitioners would contend that as per G.O.Ms.No.259 Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 21.6.2016, the writ petitioners are entitled to claim compensation on par with the patta land owners and requested to confirm the order passed by the learned single Judge. He placed on record a copy of the G.O., wherein the Government after careful examination of the issue and in supersession of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.1307, Revenue (Assn.I) Department, dated 23.12.1993, issued the following orders:
(i) Whenever assigned lands are required for a public purpose, for a project or for alienation to a Government Department or Corporation, the lands shall be resumed as per conditions of patta;
(ii) The compensation for the resumed assigned lands shall be paid on par with patta lands as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or any other Land Acquisition Act in force in the State.
4 HACJ & MSM,J W.A No.245/2019 The learned Counsel for the respondents-writ petitioners placed on record the copies of judgments of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1543 of 2018 and its batch, dated 13.8.2019 and W.A. No.860 of 2018, dated 4.9.2019, and contended that the Division Bench of this Court relying upon the judgment of the earlier Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in W.A.Nos.1903, 1904 and 1905 of 2017 and the legal position laid down in Mekala Pandu's case, allowed W.A.Nos.1543 of 2018 and its batch, in part to the extent of setting aside the order as to payment of costs, while confirming the order regarding payment of compensation in terms of Mekala Pandu judgment.
7. In the light of the judgment of this Court in W.A.Nos.1543 of 2018 and its batch, dated 13.8.2019, we feel that this writ appeal can be disposed of in terms thereof.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of in terms of the judgment in W.A.Nos.1543 of 2018 and its batch, dated 13.8.2019. It is made clear that the amount paid, if any towards exgratia, shall be deducted. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, ACJ _________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J Dated: 17.09.2019 Nn 5 HACJ & MSM,J W.A No.245/2019 THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT APPEAL No.245 of 2019 (Judgment delivered by the Hon'ble the Acting Justice C. Praveen Kumar } 17.9.2019 Nn