THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 23780 OF 2002 Dated: 02.12.2011 Between : P.Reddaiah … Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh and another … Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 23780 OF 2002 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation to the petitioner as per the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.180, Revenue (B) Department, dated 09.02.1984 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993, is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner also seeks a direction to set aside the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 16.02.1999, wherein it was proposed to recover a sum of Rs.12,882/- from the petitioner on the ground that it was paid in excess. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Assignments appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record. Despite notice, no counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. The petitioner was assigned a D-form patta in the year 1976 in respect of Ac.4-45 cents of land situated in Sy.No.1175/A/15 of Nandalur Village, Kadapa District. The said land was resumed by the respondents for establishment of a refrigerators’ factory by M/s. Alwyn Limited. Accordingly, the possession was taken from the petitioner and handed over to the said company on 9.2.1987. The petitioner was initially paid a sum of Rs.34,052/- on 12.6.1989 as exgratia. Since the contention of the petitioner that he should be paid compensation equivalent to the market value fixed for similar patta lands was not considered by the respondents, the petitioner filed W.P.No.17242 of 1993. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court by order dated 23.06.1997 with a direction to the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioner to which he is entitled under law. After that the 2nd respondent paid a sum of Rs.56,496/- on 7.11.1998 while the contempt proceedings initiated by the petitioner were pending. Thus the petitioner was paid Rs.90,548/- in total. While so, the impugned notice dated 16.02.1999 came to be issued by the 2nd respondent alleging that the petitioner was paid an excess amount of Rs.12,882/- due to erroneous fixation of the value of the land and directing the Mandal Revenue Officer to recover the said amount from the petitioner under Revenue Recovery Act. Relying upon G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993 and G.O.Ms.No.180, dated 9.2.1984, which provided for payment of compensation on par with similar patta lands, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in fact the petitioner is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.2 Lakhs towards compensation and therefore the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent directing recovery Rs.12,882/- toward the alleged excess amount paid is arbitrary and illegal. While submitting that even according to G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993, the respondents have to pay lumpsum exgratia equivalent to the market value and equivalent to the valuation for other private orchards, structures, well and etc., apart from 30% solatium, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the 2nd respondent committed a grave error in not assessing the market value of the land in question on par with similar lands in the area at the relevant point of time. It is also contended that the value fixed for the trees and the well is absolutely low and unacceptable. On a careful consideration of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is convinced that the value fixed by the 2nd respondent in the impugned proceedings, dated 16.02.1999 for the land is not in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993. Moreover, no compensation was paid for the trees and the well as provided under the Government orders issued from time to time. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16.02.1999 is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the petitioner’s claim for payment of exgratia strictly in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.180, dated 09.02.1984 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.12.1993 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 02.12.2011 Ivd