IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.25564 of 2006 Between: A.Srinivas Acharya S/o.Mutyalaiah Acharya R/o.H.No.11/13/52, Brestwar pet, Ward No.11, Block No.13, Raichur 584101, Karnataka. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanapet, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District 2 The District Collector, Mahabubnagar District 3 Smt.T.Satyamma w/o.Pedda Naganna Pedda Chinta Kunta Village, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 4 T.Laxmi Narayana S/o.Balram Pedda Chinta Kunta Village, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District 5 T.Narsimulu S/o.Kistappa Pedda Chinta Kunta Village, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District 6 Chinna Naganna S/o.Balappa Pedda Chinta Kunta Village, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District .....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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus: a) directing the respondents to refer the matter for adjudication of title and award compensation in respect of the lands bearing Sy.No.115 to an extent of Ac.1.29 guntas and Sy.No.125 to an extent of Ac.1.21 guntas situated at Peddachintakunta village, Dhanwad Mandal, Mahabubnagar District to the civil court u/s. 30 of the LA Act as per the petition dated 18.11.2006 by setting aside the alleged award dated 14.11.2006 b) direct the respondents 1&2 to deposit the compensation with the civil court until the adjudication of the dispute u/s.30 of the LA Act is completed and direct the respondents not to disburse the amounts under the alleged award dated 14.11.2006 until the matter is adjudicated as per the provisions of the LA Act by declaring the proceedings dated 23.11.2006 as illegal. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.E.MADAN MOHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION MR. N. ASHOK KUMAR The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.25564 OF 2006 ORDER: According to the petitioner, he is the absolute owner and possessor of the lands to an extent of Ac.1.29 gts. in Sy.No.115 and Ac.1.21 gts. in Sy.No.125, situated at Pedda Chinthakunta Village, Dhanwada Mandal of Mahabubnagar District, and, by evicting the unofficial respondents i.e. respondents 3 to 6 who have trespassed into the same, he has been inducted into possession of the said lands in pursuance of the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.23 of 1961 by the learned District Judge, Mahabubnagar, which attained finality in the second appeal preferred by the respondents 3 to 6 before this Court. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of such title being held by him, the 1st respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, has issued Occupancy Rights Certificate in favour of respondents 3 to 6 vide proceedings dated 03.06.2000 and challenging the same, he preferred an appeal before the Joint Collector, under Section 24 of the Andhra Pradesh (T.A.) Abolition of Inams Act, and the same is pending. While that being so, the aforesaid lands have been acquired by the Government by invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). It is the grievance of the petitioner that no notice was served on him as to the acquisition of his lands and, on coming to know that the unofficial respondents have been claiming compensation for the said lands, he filed an objection petition before the 1st respondent on 18.11.2006, bringing to his notice all the relevant facts and requesting him not to pay any compensation to the unofficial respondents and further to refer the matter to Civil Court for adjudication under Section 30 of the Act, but the 1st respondent issued proceedings dated 23.11.2006 stating that the objections raised by the petitioner cannot be considered since the draft award has already been passed on 14.11.2006 and sent for approval. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the 1st respondent, denying the material allegations made by the petitioner and asserting that the petitioner has filed his objection petition on 18.11.2006 i.e. after the draft award was passed and sent for approval of the competent authority and, therefore, the objection petition filed by the petitioner could not be considered. It is further stated that the draft award was approved and, pursuant thereto, an award was passed on 30.12.2006 and, therefore, referring the matter to Civil Court for adjudication does not arise. It is also stated that compensation is not paid in view of the interim orders passed by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.32776 of 2006 on 08.12.2006. Heard both sides. I am of the opinion that the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the objection petition filed by the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. Even according to the 1st respondent, by the time the petitioner filed his objection petition, only draft award was passed and sent for approval. Therefore, the 1st respondent could have considered the objection petition filed by the petitioner, since he is the primary authority to consider the objections raised with regard to disbursement of compensation amount and to ensure that the compensation is paid to the right person. Under those circumstances, the 1st respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Narayanpet, is directed to re-examine the objections raised by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders as per law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till such time, the compensation in respect of the lands in question shall not be paid to any of the parties. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 15th April, 2009. Note:- Issue CC in four days. BO IBL