IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.6835 of 2002 Between: K.Maheswara Reddy S/o. Chinna Venkata Reddy R/o. Kulumula Village, Gonegandla Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (SW), Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2 The District Social Welafare Officer (LA), Kurnool, Kurnool District. .....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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the endorsement made by the 1st respondent in R.Dis. (H)/176/97 dt. 26.12.99 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to refer the claims of the petitioner to civil court for determination of the market value of the land acquired by the respondents, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.GANGA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MADHURI} THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.6835 of 2002 ORDER: None appears for the petitioner. No counter is ﬁled on behalf of respondents. It is the case of the petitioner that an extent of Ac.4.20 cents in Sy.No.258/4 of Kalumala village, Gonegandla Mandal, Kurnool District was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to backward classes, and the District Social Welfare Oﬃcer (Land Acquisition), Kurnool District passed an award No.124/76-77 dated 05.03.1977, without issuing any notice, without giving any reasonable opportunity and without paying any compensation. It is stated that on making several representations, the petitioner was paid the compensation only on 25.06.1999, which was received under protest, requesting the respondents to refer the matter to the Civil Court for determining just and reasonable compensation. But, the 1st respondent, by an endorsement in R.Dis. (H)/176/97 dated 26.12.1999, rejected the application of the petitioner for reference under Sec.18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensating on the ground that the claim has been barred by limitation. The petitioner questions the said order, stating that the petitioner was not aware of about the passing of the award and the award copy was not at all served on him and he came to know about the passing of the award only on 11.06.1999, and in fact, the compensation was paid only on 25.06.1999, and therefore, it cannot be said that the reference application has been barred by limitation. As the endorsement of the 1st respondent dated 26.12.1999 is without any material particulars as to how the reference application has been barred by limitation, and having regards to the facts of the case and as no counter is forthcoming, the Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the impugned endorsement of the 1st respondent dated 26.12.1999 and remitting the matter back to the 2nd respondent for passing an order afresh, either referring or refusing the reference under Sec.18 of the Land Acquisition Act, after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 28.08.2008 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector (SW), Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2 The District Social Welafare Officer (LA), Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3 2. 2CCs to 4. 2CD copies