IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. No.807 of 1998 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Parvathipuram ..... APPELLANT AND Chodavarapu Chinappayya and 5 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. No.807 of 1998 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) This appeal is filed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Parvathipuram in O.P.No.25/1996 dated 18.10.1996 in awarding compensation in respect of the acquired assigned lands of the respondents/claimants @Rs.7,500/- per acre based on the compensation awarded by the Reference Court covered by the same notification in LAOP.11/86 dated 28.04.1996. 2. The lands of an extent of Ac.2.97 cents situated in Makkuva village of Makkuva Mandal, Visakhapatnam District were acquired for excavation of the main canal of VRS Project pursuant to the notification issued under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) which was published on 09.08.1984. The total extent of lands acquired under the said notification was Ac.6.76 cents of the same village. No award was passed in respect of the acquired lands of the claimants herein on the ground that they are assigned lands, but in so far as the remaining lands i.e. zeroyathi lands are concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.14/1985 dated 27.01.1988 awarding compensation @Rs.4,600/- per acre. On the request of the claimants under Award No.14/1985, the matter was referred to Civil Court under Sec.18 of the Act in LAOP.11/1996 and the Reference Court i.e. Subordinate Judge, Parvathipuram under Ex.A1 order dated 28.04.1996 fixed the compensation @Rs.7,500/- per acre. 3. In so far as D-Form patta holders/claimants herein are concerned, as no award was passed, they have filed a civil suit in O.S.No.18/1990 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Parvathipurm for issuance of directions to the Land Acquisition Officer to pass award in respect of the acquired lands of the claimants herein and the said suit was decreed and accordingly, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.14-a/1985 dated 27.01.1988 fixing the compensation @Rs.4,600/- per acre in respect of the acquired lands of the claimants herein. Against the said award, the claimants herein filed a civil suit in O.S.30/1991 seeking direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter under Sec.18 of the Act to Civil Court and the same was allowed and thus, the matter was referred to the Reference Court in L.A.O.P.No.25/1996. 4. To prove their respective contentions, on behalf of claimants, the 4th claimant was examined himself as PW 1 and Exs.A1 to A4 were marked, and on behalf of Land Acquisition Officer, RW 1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2 were marked. 5. Ex.A1 is the certified copy of the order dated 28.04.1996 in the connected L.A.O.P.11/1986 pertaining to the Award No.14/1985 in respect of zeroyathi lands under which the Reference Court fixed the compensation @Rs.7,500/- per acre. It is contended that the claimants/assignees whose lands were acquired under the self-same 4(1) notification are also entitled to the compensation @Rs.7,500/- per acre. The Reference Court following the Ex.A1 order, fixed the compensation @Rs.7,500/- per acre in respect of the acquired lands of the claimants herein. 6. It is the case of the Land Acquisition Officer that the D-Form patta holders whose lands are acquired for the purpose of construction of Vengalarayasagaram Project are not entitled for any compensation and therefore, the said lands are excluded in the publication at the time of initiating the land acquisition proceedings. 7. It is not in dispute that a Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Land Acquisition Officer-cum-R.D.O v. Mekala Pandu[1] held that the assignees whose lands were acquired for the public purpose are also entitled for the compensation based on the market value. If that be so, we are of the opinion that the claimants/assignees whose lands were acquired for public purpose are also entitled to compensation based on the market value. We are also of the opinion that the compensation fixed by the Reference Court based on the compensation fixed by the Reference Court under Ex.A1 in respect of similarly situated lands covered by the self-same acquisition proceedings cannot be said as illegal. 8. In that view of the matter, we do not see any grounds to interfere with the impugned order. The Appeal Suit is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J _________________ NOUSHAD ALI,J Dated: 07.09.2010 Dsr [1] 2004(2) ALT 546 (L.B)