THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.18833 of 2000 Date: 07-02-2008 Between: K.Venkatesam. ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector, Karimnagar, and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.18833 of 2000 ORDER: The petitioner is statedly assignee of land admeasuring Acs.3.00 in survey No.51 situated at Mustipalli Village, Sircilla Mandal, Karimnagar District. Assignment was made in 1980 by way of D Form patta. In 1987, land was resumed and distributed as house site pattas to others. Compensation was not paid as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LA Act, for brevity). When petitioner requested for such compensation, respondents paid an amount of Rs.81,000/- by way of demand draft dated 17.08.1993 as ex-gratia. Petitioner contends that even if assigned land is resumed for public purpose, assignee is entitled for all the benefits as per the provisions of LA Act. Therefore, instant writ petition is filed seeking benefits as are entitled under LA Act. It is settled law that even when assigned land is resumed for public purpose, assignee is entitled for compensation as provided under LA Act. (see LAO-cum-RDO, Chevella Division, Domalaguda, Hyd v Mekala Pandu[1]). The decision of this Court in Mekala Pandu, however, is subject matter of pending appeals before Supreme Court. Therefore, in P.Mallaiah v Government of A.P.[2], this Court disposed of similar matters observing as below. Whether the Government is bound to pay compensation to the assignees under the provisions of the Act where such assigned lands are resumed by the Government for public purpose? A Full Bench of five learned Judges of this Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v Bondapalli Sanyasi[3] while overruling the earlier decision of Full Bench of three learned Judges in State of A.P. v P.Peda Chinnayya[4], held that when the land is resumed in terms of the grant, no compensation be payable towards resumption of land and that compensation, however, is payable if the lands have not been resumed by following due process of law. The Full Bench of seven learned Judges in Mekala Pandu case (supra) on reconsideration of the issue did not accept the view of the Full Bench of five learned Judges in Bondapalli Sanyasi case (supra) and held that assignees of Government lands are entitled to payment of compensation equivalent to the full market value of the land and other benefits on par with full owners of the land even in cases where the assigned lands are taken possession by the State in accordance with the terms of the grant. It was also held that the conditions incorporated in patta/deed of assignment shall not operate as a clog putting any restriction on the right of the assignee to claim full compensation as owner of the land… … … … It is brought to the notice of this Court that State has filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against Mekala Pandu case (surpa). This Supreme Court has passed orders staying any further payment of compensation which only means that even if assigned lands are resumed, the State need not pay any compensation as per the provisions of the Act in view of the stay orders. Though the ratio in Mekala Pandu case (supra) applies to this case, having regard to the orders of the stay, the petitioner can enforce his right to claim compensation only when the view of this Court in Mekala Pandu case (supra) is upheld. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that in accordance with the orders of Government in G.O.Ms.No.1307, the market value at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per acre was paid to the petitioner (total amount of Rs.15,698/-), which includes 15% additional ex-gratia as per the Government Order. But, as per the decision in Mekala Pandu case (supra), the petitioner is entitled to claim compensation as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, that is to say, solatium, additional compensation and interest. A Mandamus shall issue in the above terms. However, Mandamus shall be enforceable subject to Judgment of the Supreme Court in the appeal filed against Mekala Pandu case (supra). Following the same, this writ petition is also disposed of directing respondents to pay compensation ex-gratia as per provisions of LA Act including solatium, additional compensation and interest. Direction herein by way of Mandamus shall be enforceable subject to judgment of Supreme Court in appeals against decision in Mekala Pandu (supra). No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 07th February, 2008 GHN [1] 2004(2) ALD 451 (LB) [2] 2006(3) ALD 148 = 2006(2) ALT 742 [3] 2002 (2) ALD 1 (LB) = 2002 (1) ALT 543D (LB) [4] 1996 (2) ALD 1215 (FB) = 1997 (1) ALT 498 (FB)