IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION Nos.: 8929, 8942, 8943 and 8944 of 2008 WRIT PETITION No.8929 of 2008: Between: 1.Smt. T. Revathi, W/o. Late Venkateswara Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 2.P. Kanaka Durga, W/o. Durga Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 3.P. Vijayalakshmi, W/o.Srinivasa Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 4.G. Varalaxmi, W/o. Venkateswara Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 5.R. Veera Kumari, W/o. Veeraswamy, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1.State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Acquisition), Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2.The District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 3.Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devastham, Rep by its Executive Officer, Indrkeeladri, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in initiating the proceedings under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act in respect of the acquisition of premises bearing Door N. 10-3-1/16, Sampara Tatabaiah Street, Mallakarjuna Pet, Vijayawada to determine the compensation to the petitioners as arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of the right of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION WRIT PETITION No.8942 of 2008: Between: Nakka Veerakumar S/o. Nakka Koteswararao R/o. Shadhikana Kalyanamandapam, Gulam Mohidden Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER AND 1.State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Acquisition), Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2.The District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 3.Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam rep. by its Executive Officer, Indrakeeladri, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in initiating the proceedings under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, in respect of the acquisition of premises bearing Door No.10-3-70, Sampara Tatabaiah Street, Mallakarjuna Pet, Vijayawada to determine the compensation to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal capricious and violative of the right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Writ Petition No.8943 of 2008: Between: 1.Nakka Koteswararao, S/o. Late Veeraiah, R/o. Shadhikana Kalayanamandapam, Gulam Mohidden Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 2.P. Kanaka Durga, W/o. Durga Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 3.P. Vijayalakshmi, W/o.Srinivasa Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 4.G. Varalaxmi, W/o. Venkateswara Rao, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. 5.R. Veera Kumari, W/o. Veeraswamy, R/o. Vijayawada, C/o. N V Nagar, Contractor, Shadi Khana Kalyana Mandapam, Gulam Mohiddin Street, Kothapet, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Acquisition), Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 3 Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devastham, Rep by its Executive Officer, Indrkeeladri, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in initiating the proceedings under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act in respect of the acquisition of premises bearing Door No. 10-3-71, Sampara Tatabaiah Street, Mallakarjuna Pet, Vijayawada to determine the compensation to the petitioner ass arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of the right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner under the provision of Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Writ Petition No. 8944 of 2008: Between: Budigi Venkata RAmana W/o.Budigi Ramu R/o.10-14-10,Akulavari Vari st Mallikarjunpet,Vijayawada ..... PETITIONER AND 1.State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Department of Revenue (Land Acquisition ) Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2.The District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam 3.Sri Durga Malleswara Swamy Varla Devasthanam rep.by its Executive officer, Indrakeeladri, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in initiating the proceedings under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act in respect of the acquisition of premises bearing Door No.10-3-28/1, Sampara TAtabaiah Street, Mallajarjuna Pet, Vijayawada to determine the compensation to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition Nos.8929, 8942, 8943 and 8944 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: The petitioners in all these writ petitions were paid compensation by the third respondent-Devasthanam, after evicting them from the lands in their occupation, since the said lands were required for renovation of the temple and to provide better facilities to the pilgrims. According to the third respondent, the lands in question are government lands and the petitioners herein were encroachers, whereas the petitioners claimed title and ownership to the same. Be that as it may, admittedly compensation was already paid by the third respondent-temple at the intervention of the second respondent-District Collector. However, the grievance of the petitioners herein appears to be that the compensation paid is inadequate and therefore, they made a representation, dated 01.04.2008, seeking reference to civil Court for determination of compensation as claimed by them. Alleging that the said representations have not been considered, these writ petitions have been filed seeking a declaration that the inaction on the part of the respondents in initiating proceedings under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) is arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the third respondent-temple and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. A perusal of the representation, dated 01.04.2008, made by the petitioners shows that the same was made to the second respondent-District Collector with a request to pay compensation at the market rate of Rs.20,000/- per square yard and in case, their request is not accepted, to initiate proceedings under Section 18 of the Act. Since the said representation is pending before the second respondent, it is neither proper nor necessary for this Court to express any opinion as to the entitlement of the petitioners for enhanced compensation or to initiate proceedings under Section 18 of the Act. It is for the second respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners, dated 01.04.2008, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _______________ 04.07.2008 VGB