THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.24251 of 2001 Dated:13.02.2008 Between: Somu Sadasiva Suryanarayana Murthy. …Petitioner and The District Collector, Krishna District, and another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.24251 of 2001 ORDER: The petitioner is statedly the owner of land admeasuring 180 square yards (house site) in Survey No.57/6 situated at Mutyalampadu Village of Vijayawada Urban Mandal, Krishna District. The land was acquired for formation of road crossing broad guage railway track at Vijayawada Waltair Section at KM 431/3-4 Railways at level crossing No.314 in Vijayawada. Award No.13 of 1996, dated 10.10.1996, was passed and compensation was also paid for an extent of 70 square yards, which was acquired. The petitioner sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity), in vain. He therefore, filed a Writ Petition, being W.P.No.27466 of 1997. The same was allowed on 31.08.1999, in obedience to which, reference was made to civil Court. At the time of filing the Writ Petition reference before the civil Court is stated to be pending. The petitioner ultimately having come to believe that an excess extent of 45 square yards was also acquired from his house site, approached the respondents by serving a legal notice dated 02.03.2001 seeking compensation. The second respondent gave an endorsement denying the contention and advising the petitioner to approach the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Department, Vijayawada. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is filed, inter alia, seeking a mandamus to the respondents to initiate proceedings for acquiring 45 square yards of land. A counter affidavit is filed by the second respondent. After tracing the entire procedure followed for acquiring an extent of 70 square yards of land belonging to the petitioner along with other extents of land admeasuring Ac.0.34 cents in R.S.Nos.50/2, 5/3, 57/5 and 57/6 situated at Mutyalampadu Village, the respondents categorically denied the allegation that excess land of 45 square yards was acquired. It is clearly stated that out of 180 square yards of the petitioner’s land, only 70 square yards was used for formation of road and that the respondents never acquired 45 square yards of land in excess. The petitioner has not filed any reply affidavit denying the counter averments. Even otherwise, whether the petitioner’s land to an extent of 115 square yards or 70 square yards was acquired is a question of fact, which cannot be settled in the Writ Petition. Secondly, admittedly Award was passed on 10.10.1996, and even though when the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.27466 of 1997, he did not raise such a plea nor any material is placed before this Court to show that such a plea was taken by him in his claim statement in the reference under Section 18 of the Act. Be it noted, in a reference under Section 18 of the Act the owner can also raise an objection with regard to measurement of the land. Having not done so, the petitioner cannot be permitted to adjudicate the matter in a Writ Petition, especially, when it is a question of fact. The Writ Petition is devoid of any merits, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 13.02.2008 vs