THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.10427 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner is the owner of tractor-trailer bearing No. ADW-3426 and 9705. He belongs to Scheduled Caste and is a resident of Murrimadugu, Jannaram Mandal, Adilabad District. The forest department has undertaken the work of laying a road from Birsaipet to Allampalli villages with the funds allotted by the Integrated Tribal Department Authority. (ITDA), Utnoor. The tractor-trailer of the petitioner and the two other tractors-trailers owned by Sri P.Satyanarayana and M..Shanker Rao, respectively were also engaged. It is stated that the extremists in the area have visited the site on 15.10.1993, obstructed the work and have set all the three tractors-trailers on fire. The petitioner claims to have made representation for compensation for damages for tractor-trailer. His grievance is that in spite of repeated demands, the respondents did not pay compensation on one pretext or the other. On behalf of the respondents, a detailed counter affidavit is filed by the Divisional Forest Officer-the fourth respondent. He admitted the factum of work having been undertaken by the forest department to lay a road between the two villages as referred above and the engagement of the tractor-trailer of the petitioner and those of two other owners. It is also admitted that the tractors-trailers were burnt by extremists. The fourth respondent states that the damage caused to the tractor-trailer assessed by the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Adilabad and in relation to the vehicle of the petitioner, it is said to have assessed at Rs.41,790/-. The fourth respondent submits that the amount could not be paid to the petitioner on account of lack of his failure to produce the necessary documents certifying his ownership. Heard Sri P.Laxma Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Forest. This is one of the rare cases where there is virtually no dispute as to the relevant facts. The respondents fairly admitted the factum of their engaging the tractor-trailer of the petitioner for formation of a road . It is also admitted that the tractors-trailers were burnt while being engaged by the respondents. Recognizing their liability to pay the compensation, the respondents got the same assessed. However, on a very hyper technical ground, the payment was withheld. The very fact that the tractor-trailer of the petitioner was engaged ought to have been sufficient for respondents to pay the compensation. Even if they entertain a doubt as to the ownership, they could have verified from the records of the concerned Regional Transport Authorities. The petitioner belongs to scheduled caste community and he is a resident of a remote village. On the one hand, the Government allocates huge funds for the alleged benefit of the downtrodden in the remote areas and on the other hand the petitioner was denied the genuine compensation that was caused to him solely on account of lapses on the part of the respondents. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the respondents are directed to pay compensation to the petitioner on his production of the registration certificate in its original form or in duplicate form or even a certificate to the effect that the petitioner is the owner of the tractor-trailer bearing No. ADW-3426 & 9705. The amount assessed by the Motor Vehicle Inspector, shall carry 9% per annum interest from the date of the incident till the date of payment. The amount shall be paid to the petitioner within one month from the date of his production of the said document. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY,J 19.12.2008 Stp