IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1 2 9 1 OF 2009 Between: Veesam Satyavamma, w/o Veesam Sanyasai Naidu, Aged about 71 years, Occupation: Proprietrix, R/o. Saitharupeta village, S. Rayavaram Revenue Mandal, Visakhapatnam district. …. Appellant V/s. The Special Deputy Collector (LA) SVLN Devasthanam & LAO of SEZ (LA) Visakhapatnam district & Anr. …. Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri KV Subrahmanya Narsu Counsel for the Respondents: Govt.Pleader for Land Acquisition THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1 2 9 1 OF 2009 J U D G M E N T : (Per the Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari) This writ appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P. No. 14150 of 2005 aggrieved by the order dated 25-06-2008 passed by a learned single Judge directing the Tribunal to re- determine the holding of the petitioner and her family members in pursuance of order, dated 01-08-2007 passed by this Court in CRP.No. 3206 of 1988, after giving notice to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; secondly, if it is held by the Tribunal that the land in question, namely, Acs:4-91 cents in survey No. 236/6 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district is within the ceiling limits of the petitioner, the respondents shall initiate proceedings under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, if they desire to acquire the same and if the said land was held to be in excess of the ceiling limits of the petitioner, the respondents shall be free to utilize the said land without initiating any proceedings under the Act and the learned single Judge further observed that till a decision is taken by the Tribunal as directed above and granted status quo with regard to the possession to be maintained as on the date of passing of the order. 2. The main writ petition has been filed seeking mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not passing an award and paying compensation in respect of Ac:0- 57 cents of land in survey No. 225/4 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and further sought for a consequential direction to the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s land of an extent of Acs: 4-91 cents in survey No. 236/6 of the said village. 3. The main contention advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri K.V. Subrahmanya Narsu is that the respondents are trying to dispossess of the appellant in respect of the above mentioned land in survey No. 225/4 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district. 4. Per Contra, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that on the proposals sent by the District Collector, proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were initiated by issuing draft notification under section 4 (1) and declaration under section 6 of the Act in respect of 0- 57 cents in survey No. 225/4 and that after receiving the approval of the District Collector, the same were published in the Gazette and thereafter award was passed on 20-9-2004 in respect of the said extent and as the persons, who claimed compensation could not produce sufficient documentary evidence in support of their claim, the award amount was kept in revenue deposits and thereupon at the request of the land owners, on 25-8-2005, the dispute was referred under sections 30 and 31 of the Act to the civil court for deciding title and the award amount was deposited in the court. He further contended that with regard to the land admeasuring Acs:4-91 cents in survey No. 236/6, the appellant was found to be in excess of the ceiling limit and the same was notified for acquisition. He further contended that the proceedings under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1973 are pending in this court and that depending upon the decision of the court, action will be initiated by the Government to acquire the land, if it is found that the said land is within the ceiling limits of the appellant. 5. It is also contended by the learned Government Pleader for the respondents that the appellant has already filed CRP.No. 3206 of 1988 and the same was disposed off by this court by an order dated 01-8-2007 wherein the learned single Judge set aside the order dated 06-6-1988 passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam in LRA.No. 31 of 1984, which confirmed order dated 29-9-1986 passed in LCC.No. 1358/75 on the file of the Land Reforms Tribunal, Visakhapatnam and held that the lands in survey Nos. 277/2C, 53/1, 53/2, 259/1, 266/A, 58/2, 54/1, 54/2, 116, 161, 82/1, 150, 51, 52, 149/5, 148, 218, 55 and 70 situated in various villages had been treated as dry lands but not double crop wet lands. But the learned Single Judge remanded the matter to the Primary Tribunal to treat the said lands mentioned in the above survey numbers as dry lands and thereafter re-determine the holding of the appellant under family members in pursuance of the order passed in CRP.No. 3206 of 1988. It is also further held by the learned single Judge that in case the Tribunal holds that the land in question Acs:4-91 cents in survey No. 236/6 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district, is within the ceiling limits of the appellant, the respondents shall initiate proceedings under the provisions of the Act, if they desire to acquire the same. It is also further observed that if the said land was held to be in excess of the ceiling limits of the appellant, the respondents shall be free to utilize the said land without initiating any proceedings under the Act and granted status quo with regard to the possession to be maintained as on the date of passing of the order. Aggrieved by the directions passed by the learned single Judge to acquire the land if it is found to be in excess of the ceiling limits of the appellant, the respondents shall utilize the same without initiating any proceedings under the Act, the present writ appeal has been filed. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents as well. The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the matter is still pending with the Tribunal in pursuance of the order passed by this Court in CRP.No. 3206 of 1988, dated 01-8-2007 and unless the holdings of the appellant is re-determined, it will not be possible to acquire the land either by the Government or the owners of the land to surrender the same at his/her options if it is found to be in excess of the ceiling limit. But the learned Government Pleader submitted that the lands comprising Acs:4-91 cents in survey No. 236/6 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district are now becomes part of the lands situated in the middle of the land where the other lands are acquired and hence there is necessity to acquire particular piece of land in an extent of Acs:4-91 cxents in survey No. 236/6 of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam district. 7. But in view of the fact that the Tribunal yet to re-determine the ceiling limit of the appellant in accordance with the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1973, we are of the opinion that the observation made by the learned single Judge are unwarranted at this stage and it is made clear that if the appellant is found to be in excess of the ceiling limits, it is for the appellant to surrender the land, which she desires to do so, if it is found to be in excess. The status quo granted by the learned single Judge would continue pending proceedings before the Tribunal. If the Government takes a decision to acquire this particular land in survey No.236/6 to an extent of Acs:4-91 cents of Duppituru village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam, the order of status quo would not operate as resjudicata. 8. With the above observation, the order dated 25- 6-2008 passed in WP.No.14150 of 2005 by the learned single Judge is modified to the extent indicated above. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. However, in the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI _______________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 02-XII-2009. I s L THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No. 1291 OF 2009. Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon'ble Smt. Justice T. Meenakumari) Circulation Entry No. 102 02-XII-2009. COMPUTER No. 43 Court Master: I s L