HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.NO. 22802 OF 2007 DATED: 30.10.2007 Between: Surampudi Rajulu and others … Petitioners and The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Dy. Collector (L.A.), YRP. Unit and RDO, Peddapuram, East Godavari District … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.NO. 22802 OF 2007 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondent in considering the applications of the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners are owners of certain extents of land in various survey numbers in Uttarkanchi Village of East Godavari District. These lands were acquired for the purpose of excavation of Yeluru Left Main Canal under a common notification and a common Award No. 35/1985 dated 13.11.1985 was passed. One Pattisam Narayana Murthy sought for reference of claim for enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Act, to the civil Court. The said claim was registered as O.P.No.42 of 1986 in the court of Sub-ordinate Judge, Peddapuram and was disposed of on 3.6.1996. The claimants therein partly aggrieved by the decree passed in the said O.P., filed A.S.No.51 of 1997 before this court for further enhancement of compensation. It appears at that juncture, the petitioners made applications under Section 28-A of the Act for re-determination of compensation in terms of the judgment and decree by the Subordinate Court, Peddapuram in O.P.No.42 of 1986 and the said applications were evidently not considered on the ground that an appeal filed by the claimants was pending before the High Court. The said Appeal i.e. A.S.No.51 of 1997 was disposed of by a Division Bench of this court on 29.10.2005. The petitioners thereupon filed applications in December 2005 for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A of the Act. Heard Sri V.L.N.G.K. Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and perused the record. Under Section 28-A of the Act, where in an award the court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under Section 4 (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the court. It is not in dispute that the lands belonging to the petitioners and those belonging to Pattisam Narayana Murthy were acquired under the same notification and that a Division Bench of this court eventually determined the compensation payable to the lands belonging to the said Pattisam Narayana Murthy. The only issue that is required to be decided by the Collector for re-determining the compensation under Section 28-A of the Act is, whether the applications filed by the petitioners were within time as envisaged in the said provision. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to consider the applications of the petitioners and re- determine the compensation if those applications were filed within time stipulated by the provisions of Section 28-A of the Act. The respondent shall complete this exercise within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ------------------------------------- C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 30.10.2007 cvm