IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3316 of 2007 Between: Sri Balaji Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devastanam, Annapureddipalli Village, Chandrugonda Mandal, ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Roads & Buildings Department, 3 The District Collector, Khammam. 4 The Superiantending Engineer, Roads & Buildins, Khammam. 5 The Executive Engineer, R & B Department, Khammam. 6 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla parishad, Khammam. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying compensation to the land to an extent of Ac 60.00 in S.No. 39 situated at Annadavivam Village belonging to the petitioner Temple which was taken away by the Respondent Authorities for laying the road from Annapureddipalli to Chaparalapalli Village is wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 26 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the Respondents to take steps for payment of compensation to the petitioner- Temple for the above said land and pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.RAVI KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3316 of 2007 ORDER: Sri Balaji Venkateswara Swamy Vari Devastanam at Khammam District is endowed with vast landed properties in various villages. One such land is in Annadaivam village of Khammam District, admeasuring about 1900 acres. It is stated that an ordinary passage was passing through the land, and in the year 1975, the road was widened to a width of 60 feet, resulting in utilization of the land to an extent of 60 acres belonging to the Devastanam. At about that time, the road, hitherto under the control of the Panchayat Raj Department, was handed over to the Roads and Buildings Department. Correspondence ensued between the Devasthanam and the departments referred to above. The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Division, Khammam District, addressed a letter, dated 13.01.1984, to the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments, Khammam, stating that the compensation has to be paid by the authorities of the Zilla Parishad and that the Roads and Buildings Department is not responsible for the same. Lot of correspondence ensued thereafter. Ultimately, the Devasthanam approached this Court, by ﬁling this writ petition, with a prayer to direct the respondents to pay the compensation to it for the land that is utilized in formation of the road through Sy.No.39 of Annadaivam village. 2. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled on behalf of the Roads and Buildings Department. It is stated that the existing road, which was under the control and management of the Panchayat Raj Department, was handed over to the Roads and Buildings Department and the same was strengthened on both sides. It is also stated that the Roads and Buildings Department is not liable to pay the compensation and, if at all the compensation needs to be paid to the Devasthanam, it is the Panchayat Raj Department that has to pay the same. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings Department. 4. Extensive arguments have been advanced, at various stages, and records were also produced. Primarily, it is evident that what was in existence across the land of the Devasthanam was only a passage, described in the map as kali bata. That was in turn made into a road and, thereafter, widened to the extent of 60 feet. Obviously, on account of lack of proper supervision over the properties of the Devasthanam, objections may not have been raised when the road was laid. All the some, the petitioner cannot be denied the compensation for the land that is utilized for formation of the road. 5. Though it is strenuously contended on behalf of the petitioner that proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act must be initiated, this Court opines that such a course cannot be insisted at this length of time. Further, notiﬁcation of that nature would lead to claims by farmers or owners of the land throughout the length of the road. Inasmuch as the petitioner has been pursuing its claims for the past several decades, this Court is of the view that reasonable compensation for the land of the petitioner that is utilized for formation of the road needs to be paid to the petitioner. Incidentally, the Roads and Buildings Department is the agency, which is entrusted with the task of assessing the value of the properties, particularly, lands and buildings. It would be in the ﬁtness of the things that the Superintendent Engineer, the 4th respondent, bestows his attention to the matter both as to the extent of the land utilized for widening of the road and the value thereof. On completion of that exercise, necessary amount must be paid to the Devasthanam. Further, if there arises any occasion for resolution of the inter-departmental disputes, the District Collector shall resolve the same. 6. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that; (a) the 4th respondent shall determine the area belonging to the Devasthanam that was utilized in widening of the road, referred to above, as well as the monetary value thereof, at the relevant point of time, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall also be put on notice whenever such exercise is undertaken, (b) the amount arrived at by the 4th respondent shall be paid either by the Roads and Buildings Department or by the Zilla Parishad, Khammam, the 6th respondent herein, and if any uncertainity exists as to this, the 3rd respondent shall resolve the same and the amount shall be paid within three months from the date of determination by the 4th respondent. (c) In case the amount is not paid as indicated within the stipulated time, it shall carry interest at 9% per annum from the date on which the road was widened till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J 05.11.2008 v v