IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETTION No.20775 OF 2008 Between: Nammi Venkata Rao ..... Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Land Acquisition Officer and Spl. Tahsildar L.A. Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam. …Respondent The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETTION No.20775 OF 2008 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to make a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to the concerned civil Court in respect of lands admeasuring Ac. 0.59 cents in Sy.No.82/4B, Ac. 0.19 cents in Sy.No.84/1A, Ac. 0.44 cents in Sy.No.84/2, Ac. 0.10 cents in Sy.No.84/3A, Ac. 0.12 cents in Sy.No.84/5, Ac. 0.12 cents in Sy.No.84/6, Ac. 0.07 cents in Sy.No.84/9A, Ac. 0.19 cents in Sy.No.84/7, Ac. 0.39 cents in Sy.No.84/10A, Ac. 0.09 cents in Sy.No.84/10B and Ac. 0.25 cents in Sy.No.84/11A of Fakeertakya Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakahapatnam, acquired vide Award No.10 of 1988, dated 22.04.1988. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the General Manager, APIIC Limited, Hyderabad, sent a requisition to the Special Deputy Collector, APIIC, Visakhapatnam, requesting for acquisition of private land to an extent of Ac. 162.46 cents situated in Fakeertakya Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakahapatnam, for expansion of the existing Industrial Development Area pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, approved by the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.112, Industries, Commerce and Power (IA) Department, dated 22.01.1985. Thereafter, an Award No.Rc.44/82 RI-1, dated 22.04.1988, was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam. In respect of the petitioner’s land to an extent of Ac. 0.12 cents in Sy.No.84/6, Ac. 0.07 cents in Sy.No.84/9A, the names of Sri Miskin, S/o. Shaik Moula, Khasim, along with the father of the petitioner, have been shown as owner/occupier of the land in D.D. under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Therefore, all the three have right in the said land, in respect of which notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, have been issued. Similarly, in respect of the land to an extent of Ac. 0.39 cents and Ac. 0.09 cents in Sy.Nos.84/10A and 84/10B, which have been mentioned under the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the name of the petitioner’s father was also mentioned as owner/occupier. He submits that in the said Award, it was mentioned that the required award amount was deposited in the civil Court under Section 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of the said land on the ground that there was no claim petition. He further submits that Nammi Venkanna @ Kittayya is the owner of the land. As there was no representation, the money was deposited in the civil Court, which is noticed by the petitioner at the later stage, about which earlier he had no knowledge and the father of the petitioner had substantial right over the land to extent referred to in the award proceedings. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation, dated 14.12.2012, to the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, narrating all the facts and circumstances and requested to refer the matter under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for proper adjudication so as to enable the petitioner to claim the compensation awarded in the name of the father of the petitioner in the award proceedings. 4. A perusal of the averment made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition show that there was no reference about the application stated to have been filed by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner wanted to file an appropriate representation to the concerned authority. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a representation, dated 14.12.2012, to the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, narrating the facts and circumstances about the land acquired, which stood in the name of the petitioner’s father and sought to cause the reference under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and, therefore, he seeks for a direction to the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, to cause the reference under Section 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that having regard to the reference made in the Award proceedings about the name of the alleged father of the petitioner and that on the ground that there was no claim petition by anybody for receiving the award amount, therefore, the money is deposited in the civil Court. Therefore, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the concerned authority may be directed to take appropriate action on the application made by the petitioner. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, but without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent, namely the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, to take appropriate action on the representation stated to have been filed by the petitioner on 14.12.2012 within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J Date: 26th December, 2012 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETTION No.20775 OF 2008 Date: 26th December, 2012 KL