HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2336 of 2000 JUDGMENT:[Per GVS, J] This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Mandal Revenue Officer, Kotagir, assailing the order dated 17.01.2000 in OP No.251 of 1993, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan, wherein the reference Court has enhanced the market value from Rs.14,000/- awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to Rs.26,000/- per acre. 2. Arguments of the learned Government Pleader for the appellant-State and the learned counsel for the respondents- claimants are heard. Perused the record. 3. An extent of Ac.5.00 of dry land situate in Yadgarpoor village was acquired by the Government for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the same village. A notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act [for short ‘the Act’] and draft declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act was issued on 16.02.1992. After following the prescribed procedure, the Land acquisition Officer passed award on 21.01.1993 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.14,000/- per acre. Not satisfied with the award, the claimants sought reference of the matter to the civil Court under Section 18(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the reference was made for fixation of the market value. 4. During enquiry before the reference Court, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Ex.A.1 certified copy of the judgment in OP No.26 of 1993 was marked on behalf of the claimants. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kotagir was examined as RW.1 and Ex.B.1 award proceedings was marked on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer. 5. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan, enhanced the compensation by fixing the market value at Rs.26,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the State. 6. PW.1 is the 6th claimant and he testified on behalf of himself and other claimants that the land is an agricultural land and crops were being raised and previously in OP No.26 of 1993, the market value for the lands was fixed at Rs.26,000/-. The award proceedings would show that the land acquired was double crop wet land. PW.2 the Ex-upasarpanch of the village and PW.3 is an independent witness, also corroborated the testimony of PW.1. 7. It is not disputed that in OP No.26 of 1993, the reference Court has awarded compensation by fixing the market value at Rs.26,000/- per acre. The learned Government Pleader states that no appeal was filed against the said order Ex.A.1 passed in OP No.26 of 1993 and the same has become final. The evidence of PWs.1 to 3 would go to show that the land covered by Ex.A.1 is on par with the acquired land. Further, the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act in respect of the land covered by Ex.A.1 was issued on 07.02.1992 and the present notification in respect of the subject land was issued at about the same time on 16.02.1992. Both the lands are of same nature and are having similar fertility and potentiality and two crops per year were being raised in both the lands. 8. Under those circumstances, having regard to the nature of the land and the fertility of the soil and their potentiality and the yield derived therefrom, the reference Court was justified in taking the market value fixed under Ex.A.1 as basis for fixing the market value for the subject land as well. Under those circumstances, there being no other contra evidence produced by the Land Acquisition Officer, the market value as enhanced by the reference Court relying on Ex.A.1 in respect of similarly situated land and fixing the same at Rs.26,000/- per acre reflects true market value as on the date of notification and does not, therefore, call for any interference. 9. The impugned order passed by the reference Court, fixing the market value at Rs.26,000/- per acre and granting other statutory benefits does not call for any interference by this Court and the same is accordingly confirmed. We do not see any merits in the appeal. 10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 27th April, 2010. Bss/lrkm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH [27TH] DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2336 of 2000 Between: Land Acquisition Officer, (Mandal Revenue Officer), Kotagir. … Appellant And: Rajan Bee and others … Respondents