The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.16705 of 2010 Date: 15-11-2011 Between: S.Sakkamma and another ..... Petitioners AND The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Dept., and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri P.Gangarami Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following : Order: Feeling aggrieved by the purported inaction of the respondents in either paying compensation or providing alternative lands to the petitioners, they have filed the present Writ Petition. The petitioners claim that they have succeeded to their respective fathers in respect of certain lands in Survey Nos.78/A1, 79/2, 80/2, 90/2A, 90/1, 91/2 and 91/3 of Avilala Village; that in the year 1999, for the purpose of conducting Congress Plenary meeting, a road was laid over the private lands without acquiring the same and; that the lands, which stood in the names of their respective fathers, were also affected by such laying of the road. Their case is that earlier G.O.Ms.No.84, Revenue (Asn.4(2)) Department, dated 28- 01-1994, was issued by the State Government allotting various lands for public purposes, which include the earmarking of five acres of land for providing alternative lands to the persons, whose properties were utilized for laying the road. However, with the intervention of the Supreme Court, the said GO has become abortive. The grievance of the petitioners is that even though their lands were utilized for laying the road, neither the compensation was paid nor alternative lands have been allotted to them. A counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.3- Tahsildar, Tirupathi (Rural) Mandal, wherein it is inter alia stated that in respect of the persons, who were identified as the owners of the land, which was utilized for laying the road, proposals, for providing alternative lands, were submitted by the Chief Commissioner, Land Administration, A.P., on 30-12-2009 to the Secretary to Government, Revenue (Assn.IV) Department of A.P., Hyderabad. The counter-affidavit has questioned the claim of the petitioners that their lands were also utilized for laying the road. It is stated therein that if it is found that the road was laid over the petitioners’ lands, their case for providing alternative lands will be considered and that so far, the petitioners have not approached the respondents for redressal of their grievances. Having regard to the above-stand taken in the counter-affidavit, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make a detailed representation to respondent Nos.2 and 3, who shall then consider and take a decision thereon. If it is found that the petitioners’ lands were utilized for laying the road, they shall be either paid compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, or provided with an alternative land as suggested in the counter-affidavit. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, WPMP.No.21055 of 2010, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 15th November, 2011 LUR