IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 7078 of 2002 Between: 1 Tallapalli Gopal Rao S/o. Aga Rao R/o.Khagaznagar , Adilabad Dist 2 Allam Hanumanthu S/o.Allam Mallaiah R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist 3 Naitham Bapu S/o.Laxmaiah R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist 4 Taladi Sambaiah S/o.Taladi Pocha R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist 5 Solla Ramaiah S/o.Mallaiah R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist 6 Allam Bapu S/o.Allam Bheemaiah R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist 7 Urkudu S/o. Bhikari R/o.Dahegan , Adilabad Dist ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The State of A.P Rep by its Prl.Secretary Irrigation , Secretariat Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engg , Minor Irrigation , Adilabad. 3 The Executive Engg , Minor Irrigation , Adilabad. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer Mancherial , Adilabad Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order , direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to initiate the Land Acquisition Proceedings relating to lands of petitioners bearing Sy.Nos.158/1 , 130, 135, 162, 161 and 165 , admeasuring Ac.7-84, 8- 13,5-90,9-110,5-88,6-48 and 7-05 respectively situated at Dahegan Village of Adilabad Dist and further direct to pay the compensation Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.MANOHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 7078 of 2002 ORDER The petitioners herein claim to be the owners of different extents of land situated in Sy.Nos.135, 158/1, 130, 161, 162, 163 and 165 of Dehagan Village of Adilabad District. It is alleged by the petitioners that the lands in question were utilized by the respondents for construction of a tank namely Chintalapata Cheruvu in the year 2001 without acquiring the same either under the Land Acquisition Act,1894( for short “the Act”) or any other statute and in spite of several requests made no compensation has been paid to the petitioners. Hence the present writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing the respondents to initiate the land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation to the petitioners with regard to their respective lands. The 4th respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Mancherial, Adialabad District filed a counter-affidavit stating that there was no requisition by the respondents 1 to 3 (Irrigation Department) to acquire the land in question for the purpose of construction of a tank as alleged by the petitioners and therefore no proceedings were initiated under the Act. However, in the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, it is stated that the work pertaining to the restoration of Chintalapata Cheruvu near Dehagan village was sanctioned on 07- 05-1980 for irrigation of an extent of Ac.125.00. The work was entrusted to a Contractor on 01.01.1981. Though the said contract was terminated on 28.01.1995 the balance work was taken up on 25- 02-1996 and the same was completed in the year 1999 and water was impounded in the tank during the monsoon of 1999. It is also stated that as per Ayacut and submergence plan available, Sy.No.158/1 and 130 were not effected and they did not come under the submergence of the said tank. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Irrigation Department it is clear that the tank by name Chintalapata Cheruvu was restored in Dehegan Village. Though it is claimed by the 3rd respondent that Sy.Nos.158/1 and 130 were not effected, the fact that the land in the other survey numbers, namely 135, 161,162,163 and 165 was submerged has not been disputed. As could be seen it is the specific case of the petitioners that the lands so submerged are their patta lands. It is also clear from the counter-affidavit filed by the 4th respondent that the lands effected by submergence under the tank in question have not been acquired by invoking the provisions of the Act and no compensation has been paid to the land owners. Though this Court cannot record a finding as to the ownership claimed by the petitioners in respect of the lands in question and their entitlement to receive the compensation, having regard to the admitted fact that except the land in Sy.Nos.158/1 and 130 the rest of the land came under the submergence after restoration of tank, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to take immediate steps for initiating the appropriate proceedings under the Act in respect of the said lands which came under submergence following due process of law. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six(6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt.16.02.2009 *Tsnr