THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.30653, 30654 and 30689 of 2011 Dated 21st November, 2011 Between: Shri Suresh Patel …Petitioner (W.P.No.30653 of 2011) And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others …Respondents (W.P.No.30653 of 2011) Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.M.M.Chary Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Land Acquisition Counsel for respondent No.4: Ms.V.Jayasree For Sri C.Damodar Reddy The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These three writ petitions raise common grievances of the petitioners. The petitioners pleaded that the properties in their respective writ petitions were acquired for road widening and that on account of lack of notices under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), they could not participate in the award enquiry. That they received notices on 08.03.2011 from respondent No.3 for attending the enquiry on 14.03.2011 and put forth proof of their ownership for payment of compensation under the award already passed on 30.10.2010. The petitioners pleaded that even though they have made their claims on the above-mentioned date ﬁxed for enquiry, respondent No.3 has not decided thereon and instead referred the cases to the civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. The petitioners further stated that the civil Court has returned the reference to respondent No.3 by opining that as there is no dispute to be adjudicated, reference is inappropriate. A perusal of the record does not show that after receipt of notices, dated 08.03.2011, the petitioners have submitted their claims. Be that as it may, the fact remains that since no claims were made before respondent No.3 claiming compensation, he has merely determined the compensation and left the issue as to the persons who are entitled to receive compensation undecided. In this fact situation, it would be appropriate for respondent No.3 to give one more chance to the petitioners to put forth their claims and prove their ownership as proposed by him vide notices, dated 08.03.2011. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to respondent No.3 to entertain the claims of the petitioners, if made within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such claims are made, he shall hold enquiry and take appropriate decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 31(1) and 31(2) of the Act, within a period of two weeks thereafter. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petitions, the interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 21st November, 2011 VGB