IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.2007 of 2001 Dated:08-09-2011 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, L.A., Steel plant, Unit-1, Visakhkapatnam ….Appellant. And C.Linga Murthy. ….Respondent. The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.2007 of 2001 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Durga Prasad) This appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the Orders passed on 13.07.2001 in W.P.No.3949 of 1996 by the learned Single Judge. The appellant herein is the respondent in Writ Petition and respondent herein is the writ petitioner. The respondent herein has filed a writ petition for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pass the award forthwith and to pay compensation to him. According to the writ petitioner that his father late Dr. C.Pattabhiram and his two brothers held Patta over an extent of Ac.255.65 cents, as joint family members. Himself, his mother and his brother are the share holders for the share of his father. In the Inam enquiry the holding was limited to Acs.158 for all the three brothers, whereas they are entitled to Ac.208.65 cents. The Steel Plant acquisition Authority in 1974, without conceding their right to the entire land of Acres 258.65 cents made a notification in Rc. Dated 08.10.1990 for an extent of Acs.158.65 cents in S.No.190/2 in Siddeswaram village, Visakhapatnam. Eventhough the notification was made as early as in 1990, no award has been made so far and no initial payment was made so far. The respondents are liable to pay the compensation at the present market value which is more than Rs.2,50,000/- as sales are at Rs.35/- to Rs.50/- per Sq.yard in that area. Himself and his other family members are entitled to receive the compensation. There was enormous delay in passing the award. Therefore, the respondents may be directed to pass the award immediately and pay the compensation to him and his other family members. The respondent has filed a lengthy counter admitting about the acquiring the land for the purpose of Vizag Steel Plant. According to them the land stands classified as “Sand Mound Poramboke” and an extent of Ac.50.00 of land covered by S.No.190/1 was earlier acquired for the Steel Plant and the balance of Ac.208.65 cents covered by S.No.190/2 was not notified on the ground that the land was classified as Poramboke and Land Acquisition Proceedings were no initiated. He further admitted about the claim made by the writ petitioner and his family members with regard to their title over the extent of Ac.208.65 cents before the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad and about the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad passing an Order in favour of the writ petitioner and his family members on 10.12.1974 and also admitted about the pendency of writ petition No.6251 of 1991 before the Court and the writ petition was allowed on 28.03.1994. According to them, they are trying to take steps to file an appeal against the Orders passed in W.P.No.6251 of 1991, as such the petitioner is not entitled for passing of award and payment of compensation since the dispute with regard to title over the land is pending before the Court. The learned Single Judge by taking into consideration of the rival contentions allowed the writ petition holding that the controversy was set at rest and the Land Acquisition Officer shall forthwith complete the award proceedings and pass award within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and he is given eight more weeks from the date of passing of the award to pay compensation to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. The appellant’s counsel has pleaded that the finding of the learned Single Judge that the Controversy was set at rest is not correct and they have preferred an appeal against the Order passed in W.P.No.6251 of 1991 dated 13.07.2001 and pleaded for setting aside the Order passed by the learned Single Judge. As per the Counter filed by the respondent, the dispute with regard to title of the writ petitioner and others was pending before the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad, as such they cannot pass any award as directed by the learned Single Judge and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. There is no dispute between the parties that the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad has passed an Order on 30.04.1986 granting of patta to an extent of Ac.158.65 cents in favour of the petitioner and his family members and there is no dispute that the entire land covered by the Patta was acquired by the Government for the purpose of Visakhapatnam Steel Plant and possession was also taken over by the Government. As the Orders passed by the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records, Hyderabad dated 30.04.1986 were not implemented, the writ petitioner and his other family members have filed a writ petition No.4137 of 1987 for its implementation and the same was allowed on 04.11.1988. Aggrieved by the same, a writ appeal was filed by the respondents therein, but the same was dismissed as they failed to show sufficient reasons for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and when the matter carried to the Supreme Court in SLP No.5064 of 1990, the Supreme Court has also dismissed the same on 23.11.1990. In the meantime, the writ petitioner and his other family members have filed C.C.No.216 of 1989 for not implementing the Orders passed in W.P.No.4137 of 1987. The learned Single Judge of this Court has disposed of the same by Order dated 27.11.1989 by observing as follows: “In the contempt application, however, it is stated in the counter that suo-motu review has been taken up and the same will be disposed of. Till then, however, the entry may not be directed to be made. Though this argument ought not to have been acceded to, however, in the circumstances, directed the authority, who is said to have taken up suo-motu review to dispose of the same within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the Order and if it is not so disposed of, it must be taken that patta stands recorded in the name of the petitioner with reference to the land in question. Since that land is said to have been already acquired, the Land Acquisition Officer will take cognizance of this Order and determine the amount of compensation and pay the same to the petitioner. However, I do not find any willful disobedience of the Orders of this Court by the respondents, since no contempt of the Court’s proceedings is said to have been committed. The contempt application is dismissed.” Subsequently, the writ petitioner and his family members have filed another C.C.No.433 of 1990 and the same was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court by Order dated 23.09.1992 by holding as under: “as the alleged suo-motu review application has not been disposed of by the Commissioner of Survey and Settlements the consequential direction that it must be taken that patta stands recorded in the name of the petitioner with reference to the land in question” became final and so the respondents are bound to implement that direction. The Land Acquisition Officer was also directed by Justice Seetaram Reddy, to take cognizance of the Order dated 27.11.89 and determine the amount of compensation and pay the same to the petitioner”. The writ petition No.6251 of 1991 filed by the writ petitioner along with his other family members was allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 13.07.2001. Admittedly against the said Order, a writ appeal in W.A.No.2008 of 2001 was filed by the respondents therein, and the same was dismissed by this Court on 12.08.2011. Therefore, as rightly observed by the learned Singe Judge the controversy between the parties was set at rest even now by the disposal of W.A.No.2008 of 2001 in favour of the writ petitioner and his family members. Moreover, in C.C.No.433 of 1990 the learned Single Judge of this Court has directed the Land Acquisition Officer to complete the proceedings within three months from that date as the Government has already approved the notification under Section 4 (1) of land acquisition Act in G.O.Ms.No.945 dated 06.10.1990 and the said Order has become final as the respondents have not preferred any appeal against the said Order. Therefore, in view of the disposal of W.A.No.2008 of 2001 and in view of the Orders passed in C.C.No.433 of 1990, the learned Single Judge has rightly allowed the said writ petition with regard to passing of the award and payment of compensation to the petitioner and we do not find any reason to interfere with the said finding in this appeal. In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed without costs. _____________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM _____________________________ JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD Dated:08-09-2011 Ksp