IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE WRIT PETITION NO.2537 OF 2007 Between: D. Venkatappa and another … Petitioners And: The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Mahabubnagar District. ….. Respondent. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.2537 OF 2007 ORDER: This Court issued Rulenisi on 18.04.2007. Counter-affidavit is filed. Heard Sri R. Dilip Kumar, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to refer the application moved by the petitioners in Award No.11 of 2005 bearing File No.B/32/2005 in the office of the respondent to the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (for short the Act) for determination of the market value of the acquired garden lands and pass such suitable orders. Sri Dilip Kumar, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner had taken this Court to the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and stand taken in the counter affidavit and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition to be allowed. For contrary the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition would maintain that in the light of the specific stand taken in the counter-affidavit, the relief prayed for by the writ petitioners cannot be granted. Heard the counsel. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent had issued a notice under Section 9 clause (3) and 10 of the Act 1 of 1894 on 7.6.2005 for acquiring lands for public purposes. The petitioners herein have appeared before the authorized authority on 22.6.2005 before the respondent. The petitioners have informed that they are willing to surrender the land and disclosed the extent of he land and its particulars. Accordingly, the petitioner No.1 has a land of 0.48 cents in survey No.17/A situated at Varkur village of Maganoor Mandal. Similarly the 2nd petitioner who is the wife of the 1st petitioner has declared the extent of land to be 0.78 acres situated in survey No.3 of Varkur village of Maganoor Mandal of Mahabubnagar District. It is also stated that both in survey Nos.3 and 17, the petitioners have grown fruit bearing trees more fully described as 16 Mango Trees, 40 Sweet Lime Trees and 40 Teak Trees. The surveyors appointed by the respondent have confirmed the existence of these trees and the fact that they are giving yield and there was standing crop at the time of acquisition. It was also certified by the Gram Panchayat. It is further stated that the petitioners have claimed a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- per acre whereas the respondent has sanctioned an amount of Rs.54,764/- to the 1st petitioner and an amount of Rs.91,854/- to the 2nd petitioner. The petitioners have received the compensation under protest. It is further stated that the petitioners have leased the land having fruit bearing trees at Rs.1.00 lakh per year. A the time of Land Acquisition Notification, the lease amount for the fruit bearing trees was Rs.12.00 lakhs. If the lease itself is of such a quantum the petitioners failed to understand as to how the respondent has finalized the compensation at a rate which is far below from the realities. It is also stated that the petitioners have made a representation by way of an application under Section 18 of the Act. They have requested the respondent to refer the matter for adjudication to civil court under Section 18 of the Act for determination of the market value of the acquired lands having fruit bearing trees. The representation is still pending before the respondent and the respondent is not acting upon the same. The delay on the part of the respondent in disposing of the application of the petitioners is causing severe mental agony, unrest and the petitioners are facing a gloomy picture of receiving a meager compensation far from realities and the truth as per the market values. Thus in view of the said inaction of the respondent, the writ petitioners approached this Court appropriate reliefs raising the specific grounds in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that an extent of 0.48 cents of land in survey No.17 of Warkoor village, Maganoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar belonging to the first petitioner and an extent of Ac.0.78 cents in survey No.3 of the same village belonging to the 2nd petitioner was acquired by the respondent for the purpose of excavation of right main canal of Sangambanda Balancing Reservoir and paid compensation @ Rs.77,000/- per acre as they are classified as category II lands. It is also stated that bore well and open well were shown in DN and DD since there is water facility available in the said land in survey No.17 admeasuring Ac.0.48 cents and survey No.3 admeasuring 0.78 cents. They are categorized under category II. There is no record to show that the petitioners have claimed compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- per acre but as per the award enquiry conducted by the Special Deputy Collector, here is no such mention of any rate demanded by them. It is also submitted that the petitioners have filed separate and individual petitions in the office of the respondent claiming that the matter may be referred to the Civil Court for enhancement of compensation under section 18 of the Act. As the petitioners have themselves have given their consent under Negotiation for the package deal consisting the land value being agreed to the rate of Rs.77,000/- per acre and valuation particulars were furnished by the Assistant Director of Horticulture, Mahaboobnagar. Thus it is not correct to say that there is delay on the part of the respondent in disposing of the applications of he petitioners as the petitioners have already entered into an agreement under negotiation as consequence of which the petitioners do not have any right to appeal under section 18 of the Act. The writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. These are the respective stands taken by the parties. The material papers placed by the respective counsel before this Court have also been referred. This Court had also gone through the representations, the notification dated 21.5.2005, the letter of the respondent dated 18.6.2005 and the Award proceeding dated 30.8.2005 and Award No.11 of 2005 under Form-8 and notification under the Act, Form-7 and the acknowledgement from the respective parties. On a careful analysis of the whole factors of the matrix, especially in the light of the facts and circumstances and the specific stand taken in the counter-affidavit to the effect that the Award is a consent Award and also in the light of the material papers placed by the respondent, the Award enquiry for awarding compensation and the other proceedings, this Court is thoroughly satisfied that the Award being consent Award and the petitioners cannot claim any right whatsoever seeking for reference to Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. Hence the writ petition being devoid of any merits the same shall stand dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ Date:18.09.2009 P.S.NARAYANA,J Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.2537 OF 2007 ORDER: Date: 18.09.2009 Gk.