IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7604 of 2003 Between: 1 M.Jayaram, S/o.Late Mallappa, R/o.Arinigaripalli, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District. 2 Smt.Geethamma, W/o.Jayaram, Arinigaripalli, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-The Sub Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.D.SESHADRI NAIDU Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in referring the dispute under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) to the competent civil Court in respect of Ac.0.48 cents and Ac.0.39 cents situated in Survey Nos.274/3b and 274/2c respectively of Animiganipalli Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri D.Seshadri Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for the respondents. At the hearing, it has come to light that in the instant case, the award was passed under Section 11(2) read with Section 31(2) of the Act. It is, therefore, clear that it is a consent award. Under Section 18(1) of the Act, the owner of the land is entitled to seek reference of dispute, which, inter alia, includes a dispute for determination of compensation only if such person has not accepted the award. As the award, on its face, clearly reveals that it was a consent award and the petitioners failed to explain any reason for treating the same as not a consent award, the writ petition is wholly misconceived and hence dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 12th August, 2008 vrn C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 12th August, 2008 vrn