IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 5868 of 2008 Between: Vagu Venkateswarlu S/o.Venkatarayudu R/o.Yeleswaram Village & Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue (L.A.) Dept., A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Deputy Collector, Y.R.P. Unit III, Peddapuram, E.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue any Writ, order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not paying/depositing the amount due to the petitioner under Award No.25/1988 dated 1-12-1988 in respect of the lands acquired of an extent of Ac.8-66 cents in S.No.614/1 of J.Annavaram Village, East Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and direct the respondents to pay/deposit the amount immediately together with interest thereon till the date of payment and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VL.N.G.KMURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: According to the petitioner, his lands were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Land Acquisition Officer also fixed the amount of compensation. On a reference sought for by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Act, the matter was referred to a Civil Court and the learned Senior Civil Judge, Peddapuram, enhanced the compensation fixed by the LAO. Questioning the said enhancement, respondents preferred an appeal, which was allowed in part by this Court in A.S.No. 488 of 2000. The Government also went to the Supreme Court and filed a Special Leave Petition, which was also dismissed. Though the lands were acquired as early as in 1988 and all the findings of the Courts are in favour of petitioner, respondents have not paid the amount of compensation as fixed by the Civil Court. In those circumstances, petitioner filed E.P.No. 142 of 2003 and the same is pending before the Senior Civil Judge, Peddapuram for the last more than 4 years. Hence, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing respondents to deposit the decretal amount in E.P. 142 of 2003 in O.P. 382 of 1990, on the file of the court of Senior Civil Judge, Peddapuram, forthwith in the interest of justice. A larger Bench of this Court in BHAMIDIPATI ANNAPOORNA BHAVANI V. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, YELERU RESERVOIR PROJECT, PEDDAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DIST. AND OTHERS [1] held in the following manner: “…In cases arising out of the Act where the amount compensation, finally determined has not been paid, a person must first resort to the alternate efficacious remedy of taking out execution and when despite taking out execution proceeding, if there is any delay caused on the part of authorities, resort can be had to filing of a writ petition in this Court and, this Court, while exercising its discretionary jurisdiction, in appropriate cases, may issue directions for immediate deposit of the amount of compensation by the State Government or the authorities on whose behalf the land has been acquired.” The said ratio squarely applies to the case on hand. The amount of compensation is finally determined, the petitioner has availed the efficacious alternate remedy by filing E.P. 142 of 2003 and the amount of compensation is not paid so far. Hence this Court, in exercise of its discretionary power, directs the respondents to pay the amount of compensation along with solatium, interest and additional market value as fixed by the Senior Civil Judge, Peddapuram, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Date: 22.4.2008 cvm [1] . 2005 (2) ALT 786 (LB)