HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14806 of 2007 Date : 02.09.2011 Between : Kalidindi Venkata Subrahmanyeswara Raju. …..Petitioner And The District Collector, Visakhapatnam & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14806 of 2007 ORDER : This writ petition is filed questioning the endorsement, dated 19.06.2007, issued in Rc.No.155/02 S.D.T.-II. The necessary facts in brief, are as follows : The petitioner is owner of 1000 square metres of land covered by Sy.No.236/2 of Peda Gantyada village. A total extent of Ac.39-43 cents of land including the land of the petitioner referred above, was notified for acquisition under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, for developing the back up area to Gangavaram Port. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 25.02.2003 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 20.06.2003. Ultimately, after taking up the inquiry under Sections 9(1) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, Award was passed on 25.07.2005. For the land of the petitioner, which is in two bits of 500 square metres each, the petitioner was awarded compensation of Rs.1,47,184/-. It is the case of the petitioner that his name was not notified in the notification issued under Section 4(1) and also in the declaration made under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and he has not participated in the inquiry, but received the compensation on 04.01.2007. On the ground that the petitioner has received the compensation under protest and made a request to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, but inspite of the same, no reference was made, a further representation was filed on 07.06.2007, seeking reference and also got issued a legal notice on 12.06.2007. On the request of the petitioner to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the impugned endorsement is given, stating that the application is not within time from the date of passing of the award. In this writ petition, mainly, it is the case of the petitioner that he has not participated in the award inquiry, but he received the compensation on 04.01.2007 under protest and made a request to refer the matter to the Civil Court, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is further represented that in any event, the request of the petitioner is also reiterated by further representation dated 07.06.2007 and the legal notice dated 12.06.2007. The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, APIIC, Visakhapatnam, has filed a detailed counter affidavit. While narrating the details of the acquisition proceedings, it is stated in the counter that the petitioner has participated in the award inquiry by filing a claim petition and an amount of Rs.1,47,184/- has been paid to him vide Cheque No.351530, dated 04.01.2007. Counter specifically avers that the petitioner has not filed any application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act within the stipulated period of six weeks from the date of Award i.e. 25.07.2005, as such, the impugned endorsement is issued. In this case, it is to be noticed that from the averments made in the counter affidavit, it is clear that compensation amount was received by the petitioner on 04.01.2007. As per the provisions under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the application for reference is to be filed within a period of six weeks from the date of passing of award, if the claimant is present before the Collector on the said date, and in other cases, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. In this case, it is to be noticed that the petitioner has received the compensation amount on 04.01.2007, but there is no request by way of any representation, up to 07.06.2007. Even assuming that he was not present on the date of passing of the Award and notice under Section 12(2) of Land Acquisition Act was not served on him, having received the compensation on 04.01.2007, at least, he had to file the application within a period of two months from the said date. As much as the respondents have denied the receipt of any representation for reference on 04.01.2007 and no material is placed on record by the petitioner to show that an application is filed for reference, there is no illegality in rejecting the application of the petitioner. Though the learned counsel for petitioner has relied on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of N.Saraswathamma Vs. Sub-Collector, Tenali[1], but mere receiving compensation in protest itself is not sufficient for referring the matter to Civil Court. To claim reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, it is obligatory on the part of applicant to file a specific representation seeking reference to the Court. Mere protest stated to have been endorsed by the petitioner, by itself, is not sufficient. In that view of the matter, the aforesaid judgment would not render any assistance to the case of the petitioner. In the absence of any material to show that the application is filed within two months from the date of receiving compensation i.e. 04.01.2007, I do not find any illegality in rejecting the request of the petitioner for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. However, this will not preclude the petitioner from filing appropriate application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, if connected matters are referred to the Civil Court. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 2nd September 2011 ajr [1] 1993-ALT-3-274