THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15708 of 2007 ORDER: The District Collector, Chittoor District published a notiﬁcation, dated 20.03.2006, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) proposing to acquire various extents of land for the purpose of establishment of a Special Economic Zone. The lands in survey Nos.597/6, 601/25, 601/36, 601/52 and 21 were also notiﬁed. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of the said lands. His grievance is that though he alone made the claim for compensation, the ﬁrst respondent has referred the matter to a Civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. The petitioner contends that the ﬁrst respondent acted with an oblique motive only to harass him and encouraged the persons, who do not have any claim or interest at all. The ﬁrst respondent ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit denying the allegations of the petitioner. It is stated that in addition to the petitioner, other persons, namely Sri M.Munikrishna Reddy and Smt.K.Subbarathnamma ﬁled their claims and in that view of the matter, he referred the matter to the Civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The petitioner does not challenge the notiﬁcations issued under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act. His grievance is only about the steps taken by the ﬁrst respondent in referring the matter to the Civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. Though it is contended by the petitioner that he alone has made the claim, in the counter-aﬃdavit ﬁled by the ﬁrst respondent, it is categorically stated that in addition to the petitioner, Sri M.Munikrishna Reddy and Smt.K.Subbarathnamma have ﬁled their claims. The ﬁrst respondent is not competent to decide the validity or otherwise of the claims made for compensation. In a way, he has chosen the best course of action and referred the matter to the Civil Court. If the petitioner satisﬁes the Civil Court as to his entitlement to be paid compensation, he can certainly get it on the basis of a decree. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy in the reference that is made to the Civil Court. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:04.11.2008. kdl