IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.16481 of 2008 Between: A.S. Lakshmana Sarma, S/o. Late Lakshmana Murthy, R/o. 4-189/1, Sundar Nagar, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Special Court under AP Land Grabbing (Prohibition Act), Rep by the Registrar, B.R.K.R. Bhavan, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ order and direction more so a writ in the nature of Mandamus by directing the 1st respondent to accept the compensation amounts from the petitioner at Rs. 180/- per sq.yard with interest at 12% and regularize the plot No. 25 with H.No. 4-189/1 in S.No. 103 and 105 at Chinnagadila Village, Visakhapatnam District by declaring the action of the respondent not to accept the compensation as illegal, arbitrary. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.VASANTHA RAYUDU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.16481 of 2008 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to accept compensation from the petitioner at the rate of 180/- per square yard with interest at 12 per cent per annum and regularize Plot No.25 with H.No.4-189/1 in Sy.Nos.103 and 105 of Chinnagadila village in Visakhapatnam District. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue. It is represented by both the counsel that this matter is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 25.02.2008 passed in W.P.No.2580 of 2008. In the said writ petition, this Court appointed a commissioner to inspect the plot/land stated to be in possession of the petitioners therein to ascertain whether they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. Pursuant thereto, the Commissioner inspected the land and ﬁled a report stating that the petitioners therein are in possession and enjoyment of the same, and the learned Government Pleader also did not object the report. Considering the said report, this Court disposed of the said writ petition extending three weeks time for payment of compensation by the petitioners with interest at 12% per annum, and further directed the respondents to accept the amount. Coming to the facts of this case, it is stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition that originally the father of the petitioner, by name A.Somayajulu Lakshmana Murthy, was in occupation of the plot in question and constructed a house therein, that and after his death, the petitioner, being his son, has been in possession and enjoyment of the same, that the plot in question is the only property acquired by the family of the petitioner and therefore, he seeks to direct the 1st respondent to accept the compensation and regularize the plot in his favour. Having regard to the averment made in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of this writ petition to the eﬀect that the petitioner and his family members are in possession of the plot in question, we extend time by three weeks from today for payment of compensation by the petitioner at the rate of Rs.180/- per square yard together with interest at 12% per annum, and we further direct the 1st respondent to accept the said amount. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ (Justice Ghulam Mohammed) _________________ (Justice C.V.Ramulu) 30th July 2008. sh