IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO A.S.NO. 973 OF 1997 DATE: 22/12/2009 Between: Hanuman Temple, Through Endowment Department and one another ..... Appellants AND Narayan Rao and one anther .....Respondents JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) The Hanuman Temple through Endowments Department has filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in O.P.No.409 of 1990 dated 28.11.1996 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Sangareddy. 2. The dispute is with regard to entitlement and apportionment of amount ordered by the reference Court. Brief facts of the case are that the properties of Hanuman Temple and Uradamma Temple bearing Nos. 1-65 and 1-56 respectively situated in an area of 101.84 square yards in S.No. 41 at Doulatabad Village, Raikode Mandal were acquired by the Government for the purpose of Singoor Project. Since the claimants filed claim petition claiming compensation of both the temples stating that all the villagers have proposed and authorized them to receive compensation with an understanding that they should undertake the construction of the temples at the New Village, the matter was referred under Sections 30 & 31 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Land Acquisition Officer deposited an amount of Rs. 20,947.40 to the credit of O.P. No. 409 of 1990 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge at Sangareddy. 3. As seen from the order passed by the Reference Court, the reference Court directed the Endowments Department to take steps for construction of the temples within four months and after completion of the construction only they can withdraw the amount, failing which, after expiry of four months, the C-3 and C-4 can withdraw the amount jointly and spend the same for construction of the temples in New Village and they were also directed to furnish the statement of account from time to time to Court. It also held that if any mis-appropriation is found in spending the amounts they will be liable to be prosecuted. 4. We have heard the learned Government pleader for Endowments and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants submits that they are entitled to receive the compensation as directed by the reference Court and to that effect they filed an affidavit, whereas, the learned Government Pleader for Endowments contended that the amount may be deposited to the credit of Sarpanch, Dowlathabad Village, so as to undertake the developmental activities of the temple instead of allowing the respondents-claimants to withdraw the same. 6. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to permit the respondents- claimants to withdraw the amount. However, we deem it appropriate that the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer in O.P.No. 409 of 1990, made over to the Sarpanch, Dowlathabad Vilalge and a resident committee be constituted so as to see that the developmental activities of the temple shall be undertaken under the supervision of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments. The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments shall ensure that the amount should be utilized in proper way. 7. With the above observation, the Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _________________​______ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J 24th December , 2009. KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies