IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 12746 of 2006 Between: M/s.Sew Constructions Ltd., (A company regsitered under provisions of the Companies Act,1956) rep.by its Chairman, aged about 60 years, having its Regd.officeat 6-3-871, Greenlands Road, Begumpet, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., rep.by its Prl.Secretary to Municipal Administration and Urban Development 2 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad 3 The Assistant City Planner, Circle-IV, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad 4 The Special Deputy Collector (LA),Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Lower Tank Bund, Hyderabad .....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 taking possession of the petitioner company property of an extent of 599.41 Sq.yards out of 750.36 sq.yards in premises bearing MCH.No.6- 3-871, Greenlands Road, Begumpet, Hyderabad without payment of compensation and without holding the compensation amount of Rs.49,66,867/- as warded in Award No.B/452/2005 dated .3.2006 thereby violating the directions given by this Hon`ble court in WP.No. 13423 of 2005 dated 23.6.2005 as illegal, arbitrary, malafide and against the principles of natural justice and contrary to the right to hold the property as guaranteed under Article 300-A of constitution of India and consequential directions to the respondents to forthwith pay the compensation amount of Rs.49,66,867/- lying with 4th respondent and refer the matter u/s.18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the civil court for arriving the just and proper compensation to the petitioner property acquired by the respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by M/S. SEW Constructions Limited rep. by its Chairman V.Raja Ramamohana Rao assailing the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation for the lands acquired and not referring the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for arriving just and proper compensation. 2. This is the second journey of the petitioner to this Court. Earlier the petitioner filed W.P.No.13423 of 2005 assailing the action of the respondents in interfering with its possession without due process of law. The said writ petition came to be disposed of on 23.06.2005. The relevant portion of the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition reads as hereunder: “The grievance of the petitioner is that the property mentioned above was purchased through registered sale deed No.1702/86, dated 14.08.1986 and established its business. On 17.06.2005, the respondent-officials went to the above said premises and made markings for the purpose of road widening to an extent of 750.36 square yards. They informed that at any moment the Corporation people would come and demolish the building. But the respondent- officials did not seek the petitioner’s consent with regard to compensation as contemplated under Sections 146 and 147 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act (‘the Act’ for brevity). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition at the admission stage. “The Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to follow the procedure as contemplated under Sections 146 and 147 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 before demolishing and taking possession of the petitioner’s property for the purpose of road widening. No costs.”” It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite notice being served on the respondents for fixing the compensation, there is no action on the part of the respondents to pay the compensation. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material brought on record. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Special Deputy Collector (LA), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad-4th respondent, having served the notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 directing the petitioner to receive Rs.49,66,867/-, is not justified in not handing over the cheque. The learned counsel took me to the notice issued to the petitioner in Form 9 whereunder the petitioner has been informed to appear in person or by an authorized agent to receive the cheque. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Special Deputy Collector (LA), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad- 4th respondent to deliver the cheque for Rs.49,66,867/- to the petitioner and the petitioner is at liberty to raise the objection with regard to quantum of compensation in which case a reference is required to be made to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:17th July, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}