THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25623 OF 2009 Dated:17.02.2010 Between: Midiam Bhadraiah and another .. Petitioners And The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, India Sarar Project, (Polavaram) Bhadrachalam, Khammam and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25623 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Though notices were served on respondent Nos.2 and 3, none appeared on their behalf. In this Writ Petition, the petitioners are seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in not referring the matter to the civil Court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), in spite of the legal notice, dated 10.11.2009, in respect of the lands covered by Survey Nos.20/2a, 21/3a, 26/2a, 32/3 and 58/4ee situated at Somulagudem Village of V.R.Puram Mandal of Khammam District, for the purpose of Polavaram Project, notified under Section 4(1) of the Act vide Notification No.212/2008, dated 19.12.2008, published in Krishna Pathika Daily News Paper, dated 28.12.2008. The petitioners submitted that the respondents have notified the lands covered by above mentioned survey numbers. They contended that their grand father by name, Midiam Thammaiah, was the original pattedar of the acquired lands and he had two wives. It is submitted that respondent No.2 is the son and the petitioners as well as respondent No.3 are the grand children of Thammaiah. It is stated that after death of their grand father, the entire property was under joint cultivation of the petitioners as well as respondent Nos.2 and 3. It is further stated that though there is no documentary evidence, the names of respondent Nos.2 and 3 alone are entered in the revenue records as pattedars and possessors. According to the petitioners, they have also succeeded to the property of late Thammaiah and became co-owners along with respondent Nos.2 and 3. Their grievance is that they are also entitled for a share in the compensation along with respondent Nos.2 and 3, for the acquired lands and that in spite of their representation, the matter is not being referred to the civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. No counter – affidavit is filed, on behalf of the respondents. But, on instructions, learned Government Pleader submitted that as much as the names of respondent Nos.2 and 3 are entered in the revenue records, their names were shown in the notification issued under the Act. Further, it is stated that with regard to the lands in question, no award is passed under Section 11 of the Act, and compensation is also not yet determined. In view of the submission of the learned Government Pleader that no award is passed under Section 11 of the Act, no directions can be given to the respondents to refer the matter to the civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. Since it is stated that as the petitioners were also co-owners along with respondent Nos.2 and 3 and as the award is not yet passed, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition permitting the petitioners to put-forth their claims before the 1st respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing of such claim petitions, the 1st respondent shall consider them along with the claims made by respondent Nos.2 and 3 and pass award in accordance with law. It is made clear that the 1st respondent shall pass award on his own merits with regard to entitlement of the claims, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order. It is also made clear that if there is any dispute with regard to the rival claims, it is open for the 1st respondent, to refer the matter to the competent civil Court. Subject to the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th February 2010 KH