HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.Nos.27802, 27820 and 28190 of 2010 Date : 1-11-2011 W.P.No.27802/2010 Between : Khaja Mohiddin and others .. Petitioners and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Secretary, Irrigation And Command Area Development, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri D. Kodanda Rami Reddy Counsel for respondent No.1: -- Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3 : Government Pleader for Land Acquisition The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These two Writ Petitions raise common questions of fact and law. Therefore, they are heard and being disposed of together. These Writ Petitions are filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not paying interest on solatium and additional market value in terms of Judgments and decrees dated 23-11-1992, 25-11- 1992 and 23-4-1991 in O.P.Nos.1482/1988, 1484/1988 and 1478/1988, respectively, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Rajampet, Kadapa District (for short “the Civil Court”). The lands of the petitioners were acquired under Somasila project. Seeking enhancement of compensation, the petitioners have got the disputes referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1874 (for short "the Act") to the Civil Court. By separate Judgments and decrees mentioned above, the L.A.O.Ps. in respect of the petitioners in these Writ Petitions, were disposed of by the Civil Court. The petitioners filed Execution Petitions (E.Ps.) for execution of the said decrees. The petitioners have not stated in their affidavits as to whether the E.Ps. are pending or the same were closed. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it is inter alia stated that the E.Ps. filed by the petitioners were closed on the respondents depositing the E.P. amounts and that 14 years thereafter, the present Writ Petitions are filed. The only grievance of the petitioners in these Writ Petitions is that the respondents have not paid the interest on solatium and additional market value in terms of the Judgments and decrees of the Civil Court mentioned above. In my opinion, the petitioners are not entitled to avail the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when they have efficacious alternative remedy of E.P. available. Having filed the E.Ps., there would have been no reason for the petitioners to approach this Court by invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction. It is the case of the petitioners that under the Judgments and decrees of the Civil Court, they are entitled to the payment of interest on the solatium and additional market value. That being so, there is no reason whatsoever for them to file the present Writ Petitions. At the hearing, Sri P. Kodanda Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the Civil Court has recorded part satisfaction and has not closed the E.Ps. If that is so, the petitioners can as well claim the same relief, which is claimed in these Writ Petitions, in the E.Ps., which are stated to be pending. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petitions are dismissed. As a sequel, WPMP Nos.35466, 35490 and 35955 of 2010 filed in the respective Writ Petitions are disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 1-11-2011 AM