IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25898 of 2008 Between: 1 K. Venkata Subbanna, S/o. Govindappa, 6879 R/o. 4-578-2, Aravinda Nagar, Kadapa. 2 K. Chowdamma, W/o. Venkatesubbanna, R/o. 4-578-2, Aravinda Nagar, Kadapa. 3 S. Varahari Kumar, S/o. Narasaiah, R/o. 7/476, B.G. Colony, Kadapa. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the District Collector, Kadapa District, Kadapa. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer Cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa. 3 The Tahsildar, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa 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 will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring (a) that dispossession and acquisition of Petitioners rights in lands in (1) Sy.No. 216/2, extent of Ac. 4.70 cents, (2) Sy.No. 224/2, extent Ac. 4.84 cents and (3) Sy.No. 203/2, extend Act. 4.56 cents situated in Putlamapalle Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District without reference to Law and payment of compensation is violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and the proceedings in Ref.No. D/1085/2004 dated 15-11-2004 as void without jurisdiction and non- est in the eye of law in so far as it related to dispossession of Writ Petitioners are concerned and direct payment of compensation in accordance with law and or G.O.Ms.NO. 1307, dated 23-12-1993; and (b) pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI S.V.BHATT Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.25898 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings of third respondent dated 15.11.2004 whereby and whereunder the lands assigned to petitioners in 1984, were resumed to Government for public purpose, for construction of medical college/sports school. Be it noted that lands of other such alienees numbering about 130 were also resumed. It is the case of petitioners that the assigned lands were not fit for cultivation and classified as dry lands, and with great amount of personal labour and expense by the petitioners and their family members the land was brought under cultivation. It is also their case that notices claimed to have been issued were not communicated to them and resumption orders issued in their back are not served to them. According to petitioners, they obtained the copy of the impugned order from similarly situated persons in the order impugned. In this writ petition in addition to impugning resumption proceedings of Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), Kadapa Mandal, petitioners also seek consequential direction for payment of compensation in accordance with law. The writ petition is opposed by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (General-Andhra Area). Two contentious issues raised by learned Counsel are that notice was not issued to petitioners before passing resumption orders and that copy of order was not served on them. Relying on impugned order itself, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that notices were served by affixing such notice in fields on 24.10.2004, which is sufficient compliance with rules of natural justice. A perusal of impugned order would show that notices could not be served on assignees allegedly for the reason that their addresses were not clear and lands were not cultivated. A large number of persons were assigned lands situated in Putlampalli village of Kadapa Mandal. When large number of persons were assigned lands and lands were sought to be resumed on the ground that they are required for public purpose and also on the ground that they were not brought into cultivation as per the conditions of assignment, no serious objection can be taken for substituted service taken up by revenue officials. This Court however hastens to add that notices in question were served or not is itself a disputed question of fact, which can be agitated before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) under Para 15(15) of Board Standing Orders. Petitioners have approached this Court after long delay of four years without filing appeals. In addition to the two submissions noticed herein, learned Counsel for petitioners also vehemently contends that even when land is resumed, petitioners are entitled for compensation in accordance with principles adumbrated in Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This is not seriously disputed nor denied. Larger Bench of this Court in LAO-cum-RDO, Chevella Division, Domalaguda, Hyd v Mekala Pandu[1] has considered this aspect of the matter and laid down as under. In the circumstances, we hold that the assignees of the Government lands are entitled to payment of compensation equivalent to the full market value of the land and other benefits on part with full owners of the land even in cases where the assigned lands are taken possession of by the State in accordance with the terms of grant or patta, though such resumption is for a public purpose. We further hold that even in case where the State does not invoke the covenant of the grant or patta to resume the land for such public purpose and resorts to acquisition of the land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the assignees shall be entitled to compensation as owners of the land and for all other consequential benefits under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. No condition incorporated in patta/deed of assignment shall operate as a clog putting any restriction on the right of the assignee to claim full compensation as owner of the land. In view of settled legal position, this Court is not inclined to accept the writ petition. Petitioners are given liberty to prefer appeal before RDO within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Liberty is also given to petitioners to make appropriate applications to District Collector, Kadapa, claiming compensation in accordance with principles laid down in Mekala Pandu (supra). As and when such applications are made, District Collector shall conduct enquiry and pass necessary orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such applications. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 26.11.2008 vs To 1 The District Collector, State of Andhra Pradesh, Kadapa District, Kadapa. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer Cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa. 3 The Tahsildar, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District. 4 2CCs to 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} [1] 2004 (2) ALD 451 (LB)