IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos : 1738 and 1748 of 2002 Writ Petition No.1738 of 2002 Between: 1 Vangari Gangarajam S/o.Pedda Gangaram R/o.H.No.2-1-429, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 2 Pohar Lingusa S/o.Juwaji R/o.H.No.2-1-430, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 3 Nadimetla Laxman S/o.Hanmandlu R/o.2-1-202, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 4 Nadimetla Rajalingam S/o.Srinivas R/o.2-1-201/C, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 5 Nadimetla Limbadri S/o.Hanmandlu R/o.2-1-201/B, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 6 Nadimetla Nadipi Gangaram S/o.Hanmandlu R/o.2-1-201/A, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 7 Annal Dasula Ramkumar Laxman S/o.Gangaram, R/o.H.No.2-1-428, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 8 V.Prakash S/o.Gangaram, R/o.H.No.2-3-21, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 9 N.Venkataramana S/o.Pedda Gangaram, R/o.H.No.2-1-201, Opp:M.P.P Office, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 10 K.Venkataramana W/o.Vegalreddy R/o.H.No.1-4-235, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 11 N.Shankar S/o.Hanmandlu R/o.2-1-202/A, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 12 Gangula Bhoomaiah S/o.Narsimlu R/o.1-4-93, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 13 Gangula Ashok S/o.Bhomaiah R/o.H.No.land in S.No.781, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. 14 Gangula Gangadevi W/o.Bhomaiah O/o.Land in S.No.974, Main Road, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Dist.Collector Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, (R.D.O.), Jagitial Division, Jagtial Village and Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, (M.R.O.), Metpally Mandal, Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. 4 The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, High way Division, Perkit Village, Armoor Mandal, Nizamabad Dist. 5 The Deputy Engineer( D.E.), Roads and Buildings, High way Division, Jagitial Village and Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. 6 The Executive Officer Grampanchayath Metpally Village and Mandal, Karimnagar Dist. .....RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION NO : 1748 of 2002 Between: 1 C. Venkat Narsaiah s/o. Venkaiah R/o. H.No. 1-1-742, New Bus-Stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 2 D.S. Gangadhar S/o. Shivaji R/o. H.No. 1-1-703, New Bus-Stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 3 V. Chinna Rajanna S/o. Buchanna R/o. H.No. 1-3-282, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 4 Vushakola Shanker S/o. Rajaiah R/o. H.No. 1-1-760 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 5 K. Shanker S/o. Rajanna R/o. H.No. 1-1-764 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 6 Md. Jaffer S/o. Md. Abdul Khader R/o. H.No. 2-1-40, Godam Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 7 V. Pedda Rajaiah S/o. Buchaiah R/o.1-3-120, Godam Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 8 Kandlepu.Rajaram S/o. Gangaram R/o.2-5-44 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 9 Shikari Gopikrishna S/o. Dattatreya R/o.1-1-813, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 10 M.A. Saleem S/o. Abdul Karim (Kubra Begum) R/o. 1-1-751 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 11 G. Rajaiah S/o. Gangaram R/o. 1-1-695 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 12 A. Mahesh S/o. Laxmi Rajam R/o. 1-1-697 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 13 B. Pushpa W/o. Satyanarayana R/o. 2-6-181 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 14 V. Rajaiah S/o. Lingaiah R/o. 1-3-290 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 15 Kotagiri Rajesham S/o. Lingaiah R/o., 1-3-277 Near Shanker Oil Mill, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 16 Dondi Gangaram S/o. Girmaji R/o.2-6-272, New Bus-Stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 17 Bheemanathi Gangubai W/o. Kanthaiah R/o. 1-3-200 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 18 Alladi Laxminarayana S/o. Bhumaiah R/o. 2-5-39 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 19 Mantri Srimannarayana S/o. Narsaiah R/o. 2-6-230 New bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 20 Basetti Laxminarayana S/o. Hanmandlu R/o. 2-6-225, New Bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 21 Gundeti SuryaBai W/o. Rajaiah R/o. 2-6-234 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 22 Basetti Shankaraiah S/o. Ramulu R/o. 2-6-199, New Bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 23 Tuniki Gopal S/o. Rmanaiah R/o. 1-3-183 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 24 Tuniki Laxmirajam S/o. Ramanaiah R/o. 1-3-184 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 25 Tuniki Chandraprakash S/o. Ramanaiah R/o. 1-3-176 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 26 Alimi Shanker Gupta S/o. Ramulu R/o. 2-2-69, Old Bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 27 A. Saroja W/o. Bhasker R/o. 2-2-65, Old Bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 28 Gone Pedda Gangu Bai W/o. Rajaiah R/o. 1-3-185, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 29 Gone Chinna Gangu Bai W/o. Rajaiah R/o. 1-3-190 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 30 Gone Prasad S/o. Rajaiah R/o. 1-1-805, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 31 Gone Nagaraju S/o. Rajaiah R/o. 1-1-806 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 32 Mukka Pedda Dharma Raju S/o. Laxminarayana R/o. 1-1763 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 33 Mukka AnanthaLaxmi W/o. Limbaiah R/o. 1-3-253 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 34 Gatla Laxminaryana S/o. VenkatNarsaiah R/o. 1-1-691 Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 35 V. Shankaraiah S/o. Buchaiah Owner of H.No. 1-3-286 and 287, Of Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 36 V. Upender S/o. Ramulu R/o. H.No. 1-3-288, Near Godam Road, Near Shiva theatre, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 37 Votarikari Sambaiah S/o. Chinna Rajanna R/o. 2-5-42 Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 38 Kota Padma Bhai W/o. Ramulu R/o. 1-1-766, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 39 Padigela Bhagya Devi W/o. Laxman R/o. H.no. 1-1-765, Near Hanman temple, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 40 Jumbarthi Shanker S/o. Bhumaiah R/o.H.no. 2-6-176, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 41 Jumbarthi Gangaram S/o. Yellaiah R/o. 2-6-178, Main Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. 42 Thadka Narayana S/o. lingaiah R/o. 2-5-69, near old Bus-stand Road, Koratla (V) & (M) Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, (R.D.O) Jagtial Division, Jagtial (V)&(M) Karimngar District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, (M.R.O) Koratla Mandal, Koratla(V) & (M), Karimnagar District. 4 The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, Highway Division, Perkit Village, Armoor Mandal, Nizamabd District. 5 The Deputy Engineer (D.E), Roads & Builidngs, Highway Division, Jagtial (V) & (M), Karimnagar District. 6 The Commissioner, Koratla Municipality Koratla (V) & (M), Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR K.VENU MADHAV FOR MR.M.A.BARI Counsel for Respondents 1 to 3: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for respondents 4 and 5: None appeared Counsel for respondent No.6: MR POLISETTI RADHAKRISHNA The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: Since these two writ petitions raise common issues, they are heard and being disposed of together. Heard Sri K.Venu Madhav, learned counsel representing Sri M.A.Bari, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Polisetti Radhakrishna, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6, and perused the record. In both these writ petitions, the petitioners sought for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to initiate land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation to them for the land acquired and structures demolished at Metpally and Koratla Villages respectively, Karimnagar District. In connection with the work of maintaining 100 feet of National Highway-16 from Metpally to Jagityal, several structures raised on the road margin up to the width of 100 feet were demolished. Similar measures were taken in respect of different roads passing through different towns and villages. It appears a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18736 of 1997 directed the District Judges concerned to appoint Advocates-Commissioner to ascertain whether the structures demolished were situated on the private properties or on the Government properties. Directions were given to the Mandal Revenue Officers, Revenue Divisional Officers and Executive Officers concerned to determine whether the property in question belongs to the Government or to any other local self Government authority or to the private persons. Evidently, the District Judge, Karimnagar, appointed Sri Raj Mohammad of Metpally Bar, Karimnagar, as Advocate-Commissioner on 12-01-1998 and he submitted a report in this Court on 19-03-1998. The names of all the petitioners are included in the said report. The petitioners filed these two writ petitions to direct the respondents to pay compensation to them on the basis of the said report of the Advocate- Commissioner. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Koratla Mandal, Karimnagar District- respondent No.3 filed a counter-affidavit in which it is, inter alia, stated that all the petitioners have constructed their houses/shops on the road margins without leaving 50 feet on either side from middle of the road, which was the sanctioned width, as evident from the Municipal Commissioner’s proceedings No.989/Com/88A/KMC and 84/Com/1988A/KMC; that the contention of the petitioners that the width of the road is 66 feet is not correct; that in the year 1996, a programme was taken up by the Revenue and Municipal authorities, Koratla, to remove encroachments on the road margins up to the road width of 100 feet to facilitate smooth plying of vehicles and that in pursuance of the same, proceedings for removal of encroachments were initiated by issuing notices under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for short “the Act”) on 26-10-1997 to 180 persons and that orders were passed under Section 6 of the Act in the year 1997 itself for eviction of the unauthorized occupants of the road margin. The answering respondent further relied on judgment dated 03-02-1998 of this Court in W.P.No.18736 of 1997 to bring home his contention that even according to the said judgment, if the structures were raised in the Government property, no damages need to be paid in respect thereof. On the above premises, the respondents denied their liability to pay any compensation. At the hearing, Sri K.Venu Madhav, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the Advocate-Commissioner quantified the loss of property caused due to demolitions by the respondents and hence, in view of the Division Bench judgment, the petitioners are entitled to be compensated. I have carefully considered this submission of the learned counsel. The Division Bench in W.P.No.18736 of 1997 gave certain directions which include that if the authorities, namely; Mandal Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer and Executive Officer of the local authority etc., want to take any action for eviction, dispossession or demolition, they have to first issue notices to the occupants calling upon them to show cause against the proposed action. On receipt of the objections, the Mandal Revenue Officer or the other authorities concerned shall determine the extent of encroachment or unauthorized occupation and also whether the property in question belongs to the Government or to any other local self Government authority or the same is a private land and that in case of demolition of the private property, the Mandal Revenue Officer or the other authorities concerned shall determine the loss caused to the occupants on the basis of the assessment to be made by the Engineer of Roads and Buildings Department. It is further directed that on such assessment of damages, the Mandal Revenue Officer or the authority concerned shall take appropriate action to disburse the amount quantified and that if the demolition taken place is in respect of the property of the Government, the question of payment of damages will not arise and the occupants are entitled to remove the material used for the construction. In this case though the petitioners claimed that they are the owners and possessors of the sites on which houses and shops mentioned in paragraph 2 of their affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions were constructed, they have not filed an iota of documentary evidence in support of their plea of ownership. It is also not their plea that they have filed those documents of title before the Advocate-Commissioner. Even the Advocate-Commissioner, in his report, stated that some of the victims filed Gram Panchayat and Municipal permissions and others have not filed such permissions. He has not stated, in his report, whether any of the petitioners filed their documents of title and the permissions obtained by them for raising structures. Irrespective of whether the contemplated road width was 66 feet or 100 feet, unless the petitioners are able to show that they are the owners of the property over which they raised the constructions, which were demolished by the respondents, the question of payment of compensation does not arise. This indeed is the purport of the Division Bench judgment on which the petitioners are placing heavy reliance. Respondent No.3, as noted above, in his counter-affidavit categorically asserted that the properties over which the petitioners raised their structures belong to the Government and in fact proceedings under the Act were initiated and that orders under Section 6 of the Act were passed. In the face of these undisputed facts, it is not possible for this Court to direct the respondents to pay compensation on the basis of the report of the Advocate-Commissioner, which in my view has not taken into consideration the directions given by the Division Bench in ascertaining whether the property, on which the structures raised by the petitioners and demolished by the respondents, was private property of the petitioners or not. Hence, the writ petitions are dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 7th August, 2008 vrn