HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.A.No.692 of 1995 Date: 23-11-2010 Between: The District Collector, Mahabubnagar and others ……… Appellants and P. Shivanarayana and others …….. Respondents HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.A.No.692 of 1995 JUDGMENT: (Per HACJ) The appellants in this appeal, filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, are the State represented by the District Collector, Mahabubnagar and other authorities representing Engineering Department, who seek to assail the order, dated 27-12-1994 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court while allowing W.P.No.12877 of 1992, where the writ petitioners- respondents herein sought to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the third appellant, who is the concerned authorities, to raise the requisition forthwith for acquiring the lands belonging to them so as to enable the other authorities to initiate proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act and for passing the award and making payment of the compensation. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition on behalf of the appellants, and Sri C.B. Ram Mohan Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. The facts, in brief, are that the writ petitioners-respondents are the residents of Venkonpalli and Turkonipally villages of Gadwal Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. In pursuance of the commencement of a lift irrigation scheme for irrigating the lands by lifting water from Krishna River under the scheme called ‘Kothapalli Lift Irrigation Scheme’, the Government sought to create water passage canal filling the Turkonipalli tank bund so that the same could be supplied to the lands in the nearby village. As a result of such scheme and the commencement of the work, a substantial extent of Ac.70-27 guntas along with the wells therein was submerged as long back as in the year 1991 and thereby the writ petitioners-respondents are deprived of their legitimate right, possession and enjoyment of the land, which is their only livelihood being the exclusive agriculturists. 4. The case of the writ petitioners-respondents was that in spite of repeated requests, both orally and in writing, no steps were taken and their only breadwinning source is being deprived and for no fault of them, they are being deprived of the substantive right and enjoyment. Hence the writ petition. 5. Contesting the writ petition, the case of the appellants, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the third appellant herein, is denial to the submersion as alleged by the writ petitioners- respondents. 6. The learned single Judge, by taking into account that virtually there being no serious dispute in regard to the aforesaid factum of submersion and denial of proprietary and substantive rights of the lands belonging to the writ petitioners-respondents and there being no due process of acquisition and payment of compensation has been taken course, allowed the writ petition directing the appellants herein to immediately take necessary steps to acquire the lands which was submerged on account of implementation of ‘Kothapalli Lift Irrigation Scheme’. Hence this Appeal. 7. As against the said order of the learned single Judge, when the matter has come up before this Court post initial admission stage, a Division Bench of this Court directed for a report from the District Judge, Mahaboobnagar and also from the concerned authorities. Both of them have submitted the reports, which amply disclose and support the case of the writ petitioners-respondents that the lands are being affected. There has been, thus, repeated exercise by this Court to make local inspections, and also made observations on various dates of hearing by taking note of the said reports seeking the State government to take decision, on the basis of the reports of the District Judge, Mahaboobnagar and also Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Erramanzil, Hyderabad, for acquiring the lands and making payment of compensation. 8. Though there is a denial on the part of the appellants herein about the very factum of submerge, however the reports would indicate otherwise more so it is the observation on the part of the officers of the appellants and down level that there is no possibility of making a survey in view of the water reaching full tank level and the existence of mud and water logging etc. On the face of it, we are of the view that all along that has been an attempt on the part of the appellants and also their subordinates to utter dismal. In spite of the fact that the lands are submerged, as a result of which the writ petitioners-respondents could not possibly remain in possession or enjoy the same by regular cultivation or otherwise, there is no serious attempt on the part of the appellants to get over the observations and findings of the District Judge, Mahaboobnagar and also Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation. A further direction was also made by this Court for a joint inspection report of the Revenue Divisional Engineer, Gadwal, Executive Engineer, I.B. Division, Wanaparthy and the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Mahaboobnagar, dated 27-12-2008, which again supports the case of the writ petitioners-respondents. 9. There has been a direction by this Court on 24-06-2009 to once again call for a fresh report from the Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Erramanzil, Hyderabad. Accordingly, a report was filed and the matter has been posted seeking for objections, yet there is no serious denial as such much less any material from the appellants’ side to deny the said factum. The entire records amply disclose that the attempt is nothing but to deprive and deny any attempt on their part to assess the factum of submergence and make due payment of compensation to which the writ petitioners-respondents would be entitled to. 11. Having thus considered the entire facts and circumstances, we do not find any ground to warrant interference in the direction given by the learned single Judge and in fact the very reasoning, as given in support of the direction for such exercise to be made for acquiring the lands and making the payment, gets strengthened by various reports obtained by this Court as could be evident from the record. Therefore, we do not find any merits in this Appeal. 12. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with a direction that the appellants herein shall complete the entire exercise and make necessary payments within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ____________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, HACJ ________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date:23-11-2010 YCR