THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19518 of 1999 31.1.2008 Between: Smt.Katkuri Jayamma, S/o.Sudhakar Reddy …Petitioner And The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19518 of 1999 ORDER: Petitioner is statedly owner of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.3.20 gts in survey No.1 situated at Rebally village of Nampally Mandal in Nalgonda District. The land was acquired for provision of house sites to poor persons, under Award No.E1/371/96 dated 03.8.1996. Petitioner alleges that she received Award amount of Rs.29,672/- on 27.9.1996 under protest and submitted representation on 27.9.1996 seeking reference to Civil Court. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO), Miryalaguda – respondent herein; issued impugned letter bearing No.E1/371/96, dated 24.10.1997, informing petitioner that while receiving Award amount, she did not write “under protest” and therefore her application is rejected. Assailing the said communication, present writ petition is filed and a direction is also sought to respondent to refer the matter/Award to Civil Court under Section 18(1) of the Act. Respondent filed counter affidavit opposing the writ petition. The case of respondent is as follows. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 08.3.1996 and the same was published in Nalgonda District Extraordinary Gazette dated 09.3.1996. After conducting enquiry, determining market value and approval of draft Award under Section 11 of the Act by the District Collector, the Award was passed on 03.8.1996. The compensation was paid to petitioner and she received the same “without any protest” as is evident from acquittance in Form ‘CC’. Petitioner, however, made applications on 09.8.1996 and on 27.9.1996 to refer the matter to Civil Court. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that when the compensation was paid on 27.9.1996, petitioner accepted the same under protest and she made representations on 09.8.1996 and on 27.9.1996 and therefore even if protest was not mentioned in Form ‘CC’, the same does not amount to waiver of her right to seek enhancement of compensation. Nextly he contends that unless and until Award is passed in accordance with Andhra Pradesh Land Acquisition (Negotiation Committee) Rules, 1992 (the Rules, for brevity), Award cannot be consent Award. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition reiterated the position of respondents as disclosed in the counter affidavit. Whether a person, who filed to protest at the time of receiving compensation, can have the right to file application, within the stipulated time, seeking reference to Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act? Section 31 of the Act {as amended by Andhra Pradesh (Amendment) Act No.XXII of 1976}, deals with payment of compensation or deposit of the same in the Court. Second proviso to Section 31(2) of the Act lays down that no person who has received the amount of compensation otherwise than under protest shall be entitled to make an application under Section 18 of the Act. This provision fell for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court, to which I was a member, in District Collector, Kakinada v P.Nagabhushana Rao[1]. The Full Bench considered the reference made by a Division Bench in the following terms: whether the claimants who failed to protest at the time of receiving the compensation can file application within the stipulated time seeking a reference to the Civil Court and whether acceptance of the amount without protest amounts to waiver of the right to seek reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894? Insofar as the second question in reference is concerned, it was held as follows. Application has to be made within a period of six weeks from the date of award, if the person making the application was present or represented before the Collector at the time of making award. In other cases, application can be made within a period of two months from the date of service of notice from the Collector under Section 12(2) of the Act. In addition to these positive requirements, there is an embargo contained in the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 31 of the Act, which says that no person who has received the amount otherwise than under protest shall be entitled to make any application under Section 18. Insofar as the effect of second proviso under Section 31(2) of the Act is concerned, the Full Bench ruled as under. Result of conjoint reading of the second proviso to sub- section (2) of Section 31 and Section 18 of the Act is that an application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act for determination of the amount of compensation can be made by any person interested, who has not accepted the award and who has not received the amount otherwise than under protest. The second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 31 is couched in negative form and disables a person from seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act in case the amount of compensation is received by him otherwise than under protest. However, the Act nowhere lays down the method, manner or form in which protest has to be lodged by a person receiving the amount of compensation. On one hand right is conferred by Section 18 of the Act “on any person interested”, who has not accepted the award to seek reference to the Court for determination of the amount of compensation, provided application is filed by him within the prescribed period. On the other hand, there is an embargo placed not by the same provision but by the second proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 31 of the Act on such a person, who has received the amount of compensation otherwise than under protest from making such an application for reference under Section 18 of the Act. In this case admittedly compensation was paid to petitioner on 27.9.1996 and on the same day she made application seeking reference to Civil Court. Her application, dated 27.9.1996, was rejected, on an allegation that she received amount without protest. Hence dicta of this Court in P.Nagabhushana Rao (supra) applies squarely. The writ petition, with the above reasons, is disposed of. Respondent is directed to consider the applications issued by petitioner and refer the matter to Civil Court ignoring his communication dated 24.10.1997 sent to petitioner. This exercise may be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) January 31, 2008 NOTE: Dispatch order copy in One week. (By order) YS [1] AIR 2004 AP 1 (FB)