IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3792 OF 2010 BETWEEN: Chongali Appala Naidu S/o. Late Seetham Naidu …. Petitioner AND The Special Deputy Collector, (Land Acquisition), Thotapally Project-III, Belagam, Parvathipuram, Vizianagaram District and another …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3792 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the respondents to permit him to receive the awarded compensation of Rs.6,11,460/- under protest and also permit him to challenge the award, wherein the Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the compensation @ Rs.1,29,000/- per acre. 2. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.0-14 cents in Survey No.124/9 and Acs.4-60 cents in Survey No.132/1B situate at Jogimpeta Village, Vizianagaram District. The said land is notified for acquisition for the purpose of constructing Thotapally Project Canals. The Land Acquisition Officer has passed an award under Section 11(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), fixing the total compensation payable at Rs.6,11,460/- for the acquired lands of the petitioner. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the value of his lands, as on the date of notification, is more than what was fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. He further submitted that he made several representations to the respondents to permit him to receive the amount under protest and also to refer the matter to the Civil Court for fixation of proper compensation as per the present market value, but the respondents rejected his request saying that in view of the instructions issued by the Government, the compensation for land only will be paid in respect of the land acquired for canals and the value of the trees and structures will not be paid under consent Award. 4. At the stage of admission, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, appearing for the respondents, produced the records. 5. A perusal of the record shows that after initiation of the proceedings under the Act, there were negotiations by the Negotiations Committee constituted under the Andhra Pradesh Land Acquisition (Negotiations Committee) Rules, 1992. Basing on such negotiations, an agreement was entered into by the petitioner and other claimants in the prescribed form i.e. Form No.3. As per the agreement, entered by the petitioner, the award was passed under Section 11(2) of the Act and the same is also evident from a perusal of the Award. Though the petitioner is disputing the quantum of the compensation, having entered into an agreement and subscribing his signature in the statutory Form prescribed under the Negotiations Committee Rules, he cannot seek directions as prayed for to receive the amount of compensation under protest. 6. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merits in this writ petition for grant of the relief, as prayed for by the petitioner. 7. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J February 24, 2010. KTL