IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.5105 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt. Pammelamma W/o. Late Maheswar Reddy R/o. Palwai Village, Maldakat Mandal, Mahabunagar dist. 2 Venkateswar Reddy S/o. Budda Reddy. R/o. Ananthampalli Village, Gasttu Mandal, Mahabubnagar Dist ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Special Collector, Land Acquisition, Bheema Project, Mahabubnagar District. 2 The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Jawahar Lift Irrigation Project, Gadwal, Mahabubnagar District. 3 Smt. Seshamma W/o. Late Sugi Reddy R/o. Gorlakhandoddi Village, Gattumandal, Mahabubnagar Dist. 4 Venkataaa Reddy S/o. Late Sugi Reddy R/o. Gorlakhandoddi Village, Gattumandal, Mahabubnagar Dist. 5 Venkata Reddy S/o. Late Sugu Reddy R/o. Gorlakhandoddi Village, Gattumandal, Mahabubnagar Dist. .....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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not referring the dispute regarding payment of compensation under Section 30 and 31 of Land Acquisition Act, in respect of Land Ac. 14-22.5 guntas wet comprised in Sy.No.285 of Thappelapalli Village, Of Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District Shown at Sl.No.37 of Sec.4(1) Notification dt. 9-4-2007 published in Andhra Jyothi consequently direct them to refer the same to the civil court in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3to 5 : None The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.5105 of 2008 ORDER: Petitioners and respondents 3 to 5 are related inter se. The land admeasuring Acs.14.225 guantas in Sy.No.285 of Thappetlamorru village originally belonged to one Sugi Reddy, father of petitioners and respondents 4 and 5. After death of the said Sugi Reddy, the third respondent-step mother of petitioners/mother of respondents 4 and 5 has been managing the family properties, including the land in question. Be that as it may, the respondent-authorities acquired the said land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) for the purpose of construction of Muchonipalli balancing reservoir. Taking advantage of the fact that pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect of the joint family properties were issued in the name of the third respondent, the third respondent colluded with respondents 4 and 5 and filed a claim petition before the authorities representing that they alone are entitled to receive the compensation. Coming to know of the same, petitioners filed objections before the second respondent contending that they are also entitled to the compensation in respect of the said land, being the successors of deceased Sugi Reddy, and thereby sought to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act, but the second respondent did not do so. Questioning the said inaction of the second respondent, this writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. In my considered view, this writ petition is premature. Admittedly, compensation for the land in question is not yet fixed. As and when any dispute of this nature arises, the Land Acquisition Authority is duty bond to refer the matter to the civil court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act, if it is satisfied that the claim of the objector is genuine. Hence, it is for the petitioners to establish their claim over the land under acquisition and if the Land Acquisition Authority is satisfied that there is genuinity in the claim of petitioners, definitely he would refer the matter to the civil court for resolving the dispute. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider the objections filed by the petitioners, if not already considered, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, and shall communicate a copy of the said order to the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 11.03.2008 sh