IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20806 of 2002 Between: 1 Perumandal Peddarajam s/o Gangaram R/o Sathekapally Villlage Ibrahimpatnam Karimnagar District 2 Perumandal Nadpenarsaiah s/o Gangaram R/o Sathekapally Village Karimnagar District 3 Perumandla Chinnarajam s/o Gangaram 4 Gollapodendla Nagaiah s/o Mallaiah 5 Gollapodendla Nadpenarsaiah S/o mallaiah 6 Gollapodendla Chinna Nadpemallaiah s/o Mallaiah 7 Gollapodendla Chinnamallaiah s/o mallaiah 8 Bellala Nadepe Gangaram s/o bakanna 9 Bellala Chinnagangaram s/o bakanna 10 Uppala rajanarsu S/o rajanna 11 Uppala Limbaiah s/o Rajanna 12 Fanjari Karepe rajevu s/o Poulingu 13 Thota Chinna rajaram, S/o rajanarasiah 14 Thota Chinna ramulu s/o Rajanarasaiah 15 Thota Peddarmulu S/o Rajanaraiah 16 Nalla Vanjari Rajagangaram s/o Devoji 17 Nalla Vanjari Vittal s/o Devoji 18 Kandari Gangaram S/o Gangaram Bandilingapur village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Karimnagar District 19 Enugu Dharamaiah s/o Venkataiah 20 Enugu Chinnagangaram s/o Lingaiah 21 Enugu Nadpegangaram s/o Lingaiah 22 Enugu Peddashanker s/o DHarmaiah 23 Kandari bapureddy s/o Sayanna 24 Poshapu raanna s/o Narsimulu 25 Avula Rajanna s/o narsimulu 26 Chintakunta Ganganna s/o Lingam, 27 Bondakadi Bhoomanna, s/o Lasmayya 28 gujjeti Janardhan s/o Venkatanarsaiah ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to Government, Irrigation & CAD Department Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 the chief Engineer, Minor (Irrigation, Erramanzil, Hyderabad 3 the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nirmal, Adilabad District 4 the Executive Engineer Irrigation & CAD, Irrigation Division, Jagtial, Karimnagar District 5 The Secretary to Government, Finance & Planning Department, Government ofA.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad 6 the District Collector, Karimngar 7 The Sub-collector, and Land Acquisition Officer, Jagtial, Karimnagar District 8 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Ibrahimpatnam, Karimnagar District .....RESPONDENT 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 order, direction or Writ particularly one in the nature at Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 1st Respondent in not releasing of Loc for payment of land compensation to the petitioners whose lands were sub-merged in the Bheemunikunta Tank, Errapur Village of Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Karimnagar district Since 1980 to till date inspite of submitting RE along with the proposals to release of land compensation vide letter No. DCP.II/OF-I/SO2/1110/96 dt 7-12-2001 of the 2nd respondent is highly illegal, irregular, against the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play and prays to direct the 1st respondent herein to release the LOC for payment of land compensation to the petitioners for acquiring their lands for the purpose of construction tank in Bheemunikunta, Erranpur Village, Ibrahimpatnam Masndal, Karimnagar District and als. Counsel for the Petitioner :MR.CH.GANESH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No. 20806 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioners are owners of Ac.16-09 guntas of land in various survey numbers of Errapur and Bandilingapur villages of Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Karimnagar District. An irrigation tank in the vicinity of the said lands was restored in the year 1991 by the Irrigation Department. The lands of the petitioners were submerged in the tank. The petitioners approached the respondents for payment of compensation. Prolonged correspondence ensued. The Mandal Revenue Officer – 8th respondent addressed a letter, dated 02.04.1996 to the Executive Engineer-4th respondent furnishing the estimates of the value of the land that is affected. The compensation, together with solatium and other benefits was estimated at Rs.20,98,483/-. The Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation- 2nd respondent issued memo, dated 16.2.1998 to the Superintending Engineer-3rd respondent requiring him to furnish the particulars of administrative approval, technical sanction and the area of the land which is to be acquired for submergence etc. After receiving a detailed information in this regard, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter dated 7.12.2001 to the first respondent with a request to release a sum of Rs.32,00,000/- for payment of compensation. The Executive Engineer has also addressed a letter, dated 12.4.2002 to the Superintending Engineer impressing upon him the urgency in the matter. The grievance of the petitioners is that though their lands were affected in the minor irrigation project, they have not been paid compensation despite the prolonged correspondence among the various authorities. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, the factum of the lands of the petitioner being submerged on account of restoration of the tank and submission of letter of credit for payment of compensation, are admitted. It is stated that the proposed submission by the Irrigation Department was turned down by the Government on the ground that the Ayacut is less than Ac-100-00 and it is for the Panchayat Raj Department to take necessary steps. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Irrigation. It is not in dispute that the lands of the petitioners were submerged on account of restoration of an irrigation tank in the year 1991. When proposals were mooted by the Mandal Revenue Officer as well as the Executive Engineer for payment of compensation of the lands of the petitioners, a doubt was entertained by the Chief Engineer about the agency that has undertaken the works. The same is evident from his letter, dated 16.2.1998. Necessary particulars were furnished by the 3rd respondent. It is thereafter, the second respondent addressed a letter dated 7.12.2001 to the first respondent furnishing detailed information on every aspect including the agency that has carried out the work, the extent of submergence involved, particulars of sanction etc. It is rather curious that the Government had rejected the proposals on a very hyper technical ground. The fact is that the Ayacut is less than Ac.100- 00 became handy for the Government to turn down the proposals. It did not realize that the Irrigation Department had undertaken the work and it was too late in the day to avoid the liability on the ground that the tank is vested in the Panchyat Raj Department. Further, it is ultimately the Government that has to pay the compensation whether through the Irrigation Department or Panchayat Raj Department. As long as the lands were subjected to submersion in the project, the respondents cannot avoid their liability. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and respondents 1, 2, 3 and 6 are directed to take necessary steps for payment of compensation to the lands of the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J 24.12.2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ }