THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10084 of 2002 DATED:12.10.2009 Between: Shaik Shafyathulla Khan. …Petitioner And The Divisional Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Rajampet, Rajampet Mandal, Cuddapah District, And others. …Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10084 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner is a resident of Narapureddypalli Village of Nandaluru Mandal in Kadapa District. He purchased an extent of Acs.3.49 cents in survey No.1201/2 under registered sale deed in 1980. He then obtained pattadar passbooks and title deeds from the third respondent. He states that an extent of 0.60 cents out of the said land was utilized for laying a new road from Kadapa to Rajampet. Though the respondents issued necessary notification and declaration under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity), no such notification was issued in respect of Ac.0.60 cents belonging to the petitioner. Therefore, he filed the instant Writ Petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in dispossessing the petitioner from Ac.0.60 cents of land as illegal and arbitrary. He also seeks a consequential direction to the respondents to initiate proceedings under the Act and pay compensation to him. The second respondent filed counter affidavit. The allegation of the petitioner that the lands were acquired for widening the road from Kadapa-Renikunta highway is admitted. The allegation of the petitioner that his land admeasuring Ac.0.60 cents comprised in survey No.1201/2 was also taken is not denied. It is further stated that the said land being assigned land, the same was not included in the notification under the Act and that the assignee will be paid ex gratia in accordance with the order of Government in G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993. This Court heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Land Acquisition). Learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed before this Court Xerox copies of the relevant pages from the Re- survey and Re-Settlement Register for the Village of Nandalur. According to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the old survey No.1/1 out of which new survey No.1201/2 was carved out is a Government land, and therefore, there is no necessity for acquiring the land. This Court, however, after perusing the revenue records placed before this Court is not able to countenance the submission. Survey No.1201/1 and survey No.1201/2 were carved out of old survey No.1/1. Though old survey Nos.2 to 4 are shown as river, the same is not the case with old survey No.1/1. In column No.16 of the Re-Survey and Re-Settlement Register the land in old survey No.1 is said to be patta land belonging to Kamisetti Ellayya, Chakravarti Sundaracharyulu and Ismalsabugari Katarusabu, Mahammadsabu and Kajamiyyagari Pedda Mastanu. This belies any contention that it is a Government land. Nextly, though a bald averment is made in the counter affidavit of the second respondent that the land in survey No.1201/2 of Nandalur is assigned land, no material is placed before this Court in support of the same. On probabilities, therefore, it must be held that the contention of the respondents stands not proved, whereas the learned Counsel for the petitioner placed before this Court a Xerox copy of the sale deed which shows that his client purchased the land under registered document for a valuable consideration. The copies of the pattadar pass books and title deeds are annexed to the Writ Petition. As per Section 6-A of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, the pattadar pass books and title deeds are prima facie proof of title unless that is rebutted. No such rebuttal evidence is placed before this Court. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to initiate proposals to acquire the land admeasuring Ac.0.60 cents and pay compensation in accordance with law. This exercise may be completed within a period of six months form the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 12.10.2009 vs