IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2653 of 2003 Between: 1 Thunti Ramanaiah S/o Yellaiah, R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 2 Thunti Chinnaiah S/o Yellaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 3 Thunti Yellaiah (Died), By his Lr.Son Pitchaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 4 Thunti Narayana (Died), Rep.by Lr.Wife, Subbamma R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 5 Thunti Pedda Subbarayadu S/o Pitchaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 6 Thunti Pitchaiah S/o Yellaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 7 Thunti Kamakshamma H/o Pedda Subbarayadu R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 8 Thunti Chinna Subbarayadu S/o Subbaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 9 Thunti Subbamma S/o Yanadaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 10 Thunti Yellaiah (Died), Rep.by his L.R.Son Yandaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 11 Dandu Subba Reddy S/o Obul Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 12 Bheemavaram Venkateswamy Reddy S/o Chalama Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 13 Dandu Obaiah (Died), Rep. by his L.R. Son Chalama Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 14 Dandu Vengal Reddy S/o Late D.Obaiah, R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 15 Bheemavaram Kamakshamma (Died), Rep.by her L.R.D/oMallu Venkatasubbamma W/o Mallu Chinnaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 16 Mallu Chinnaiah S/o Venkataiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 17 Duggireddy Ramanamma W/o Penchalaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 18 Rajula Padamavathamma W/o Narasimha Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 19 Bodimalla Rami Reddy S/o Rami Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 20 Bodimalla Venkatanarasaiah S/o Ramaiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 21 Katti Venkaraiah S/o Karraiah R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 22 Challa Sambaiah (Died), Rep. by his l.R. S/o Sankar Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 23 Challa Pitchi Reddy (Died), Rep. by his l.R. W/o Ravamma R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 24 Challa Seshi Reddy S/o Venkatrami Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 25 Challa Pitchi Reddy Rep. by his L.R.S/o Challa Venkata Subba Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 26 Kinnera Penchalaiah (Died), Rep. by his L.R.S/o K.Narasimulu, R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 27 Ragahava Reddy (Died), Rep. by his L.R.S/o Venkatasubbanna R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. 28 Singa Konda Reddy (Died), Rep. by his L.R.S/o Rosi Reddy R/o Gundlamada Village, Vontimitta Mandal, Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary I & CAD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Deputy Collector, Somasil Project Unit-IV, Rajampet, Cuddapah District. 3 The Special Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nellore, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.D.KODANDA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in rejecting the applications of the petitioners ﬁled under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) as illegal. The lands of the petitioners were acquired for construction of Somasila Project in the year 1978. Award Nos.9 and 10 of 1982, dated 15.08.1982 were passed in respect of the lands of the petitioners and others. Some of the landowners other than the petitioners got the issue relating to fixation of compensation referred under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of Subordinate Judge, Rajampet. The said references were registered as L.A.O.P.Nos.12 to 15 of 1984. By it’s award and decree, dated 05.05.1986, the reference Court enhanced the compensation by ﬁxing the value of each acre at Rs.11,000/-. The petitioners claimed that on 28.07.1986, they requested respondent Nos.2 and 3 to re-determine the compensation under Section 28A of the Act on the basis of the award and decree, dated 05.05.1986 of the reference Court. As no order was passed thereon, they have ﬁled Writ Petition No.19801 of 2001, which was disposed of by this Court on 24.09.2001 with the direction to the respondents to dispose of the petitioners’ applications for re-determination of compensation. After the petitioners ﬁled a Contempt Case, respondent No.2 passed the impugned order wherein the applications of the petitioners for re- determination of compensation were rejected on two grounds, namely, the petitioners failed to enclose certiﬁed copies of the awards and decrees of the reference Court and their applications were not entered in the Section 28A register maintained by the office. In the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled by respondent No.2, it is speciﬁcally averred that the petitioners failed to ﬁle the applications under Section 28A of the Act and ﬁled the present writ petition by manipulating the records in collusion with the staﬀ members working in the Land Acquisition Unit. He also averred that the acknowledgments ﬁled by the petitioners in the material papers are forged documents and that the signature of the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer does not tally with the signature of the Oﬃcer, who worked during that relevant period. Another circumstance pointed out by the answering respondent in alleging that the material ﬁled by the petitioners is forged and fabricated, is that their applications were not entered in the Section 28A register and the signatures of the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer were not found on the alleged applications and the said register. No reply aﬃdavit is ﬁled controverting the averments contained in the counter-affidavit. Under Section 28A of the Act, the landowner is entitled to seek re-determination of compensation on the basis of the award and decree of a Civil Court, if he had not sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of compensation. However, such a right is available to the landowner, if he ﬁles an application within three (3) months from the date of the award and decree of the reference Court. While the petitioners claim that they have ﬁled the applications within the time, respondent No.2, as noted above, has come out with the speciﬁc plea that no such applications were ﬁled and that the entire material produced by the petitioners is forged and fabricated. Exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot go into these seriously disputed questions of fact. In the face of the serious allegations made by the respondents in their counter-aﬃdavit, I am not inclined to direct the respondents to re-determine the compensation on the basis of the material produced by the petitioners. However, the petitioners are given liberty to approach the competent Civil Court for a declaration that they have made their applications within the time. In the event a decree to that eﬀect is passed by the Civil Court, they are entitled to approach the respondents for re-determination of compensation. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th AUGUST, 2008. kvni