IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTYSECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 6276 of 1991 Between: 1 Barkanti Pedda Ganga S/o late Narsa Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizambad District. 2 P. Janardhan Reddy, P. Bhoja Reddy Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizambad District. 3 B. Ganga S/o Ganga Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizambad District. 4 Janna Nadipiraja S/o Pochiga, Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizambad District. ..... PETITIONERS AND Special Deputy Collector Land-Acquisition - cum - Rehabilitation Unit, Sri Ramasagar Project Pochampad, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENT 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' directing the respondent herein the refer the matter to the Civil Court in respect of the properties, viz., Houses bearing Nos. 4-145,4-150, 4-146, 4-147 and 4-151 totally admeasuring Acres 3-00 belonging to the petitioners, situated at Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizamabad District, belonging to the petitioners, in pursuance of their applications dated 18-11-1977 made under section 18 of the land Acquisition Act Which were received and entered in the Inward Register of the respondent's office and numbered as D.R. No.3104, 3106, 3107 and 3108 of 1977. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.NARASIMHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 6276 of 1991 O R D E R: The properties of the petitioners herein situated in Sy.No.27/A to UU of Noothpalli Village, Nandipet Mandal, Nizamabad District were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for a public purpose. It is not in dispute that the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 17-04-1975 and the Land Acquisition Officer by award dated 17-11-1977 fixed the market value of the lands acquired. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the petitioners made an application on 18-11-1977 seeking reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. It is pleaded by the petitioners that the said applications were received in the office of the respondent within the limitation prescribed under law and they were also entered in the inward register as Dr.3105, 3106, 3107 and 3108 of 1977. However the respondent failed to make the reference. The legal notice dated 15-10-1990 got issued by the petitioners was also of no avail. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent to refer the matter to the Civil Court for enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Act. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, the fact that the applications for reference were made by the petitioners 1,3 and 4 within the limitation prescribed under Section 18 of the Act, has not been disputed. However, it is contended that since the petitioners received the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer without protest, they are not entitled to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act. So far as the petitioner No.2 is concerned, it is stated that he is not at all an awardee in the award bearing No.5/77-78 dated 17-11-1977 for any of the properties in question and his name did not find place in the concerned acquittance register and therefore, he cannot maintain the present writ petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. Under Section 18 of the Act, any person interested who has not accepted the award may require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court. As per Section 18(2) of the Act, such application shall be made within six weeks from the date of the Collector’s award, if the applicant was present at the time when the award was made. In other cases, such application has to be made within two months from the date of service of notice from the Collector under Section 12(2) of the Act. In the case on hand, the fact that except petitioner No.2, the other petitioners made such applications seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act, within the time prescribed under Section 18(2) of the Act is not in dispute. However, the only objection raised by the respondent is that since the petitioners received the compensation awarded without protest, they are not entitled to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act. The question whether a reference under Section 18 of the Act can be refused on the said ground has been considered by a Full Bench of this Court in District Collector, Kakinada v. P.Nagabhushana Rao[1]. After considering all the relevant provisions in detail, it was held by the Full Bench that failure to expressly lodge a protest at the time of receiving the amount would not amount to waiver of the right to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act, if such reference is sought within the period of limitation. The relevant portion from the said Judgment may be extracted hereunder: “…………in the absence of any manner of protest having been specified in the Act and the time when protest is to be lodged, act of filing of an application seeking reference to Civil Court within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 18 of the Act will impliedly infer that the claimant/person interested had accepted the amount with protest. Not expressly lodging protest at the time of receiving amount in such circumstance would not amount to waiver of the right to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act.” In view of the ratio laid down by the Full Bench in the above decision, it is clear that the mere fact that the petitioners failed to raise a protest while receiving the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer does not take away their right to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act, since admittedly they made the applications within the period of limitation. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act pursuant to the applications made by the petitioners 1, 3 and 4 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that so far as the petitioner No.2 herein is concerned, the writ petition shall stand dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date:22-12-2008 KLP [1] 2003(6) ALT 353 (F.B)