IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3397 of 2007 Between: 1 Vema Subba Rao S/o Venkata Subbaiah 2 Vema Srinivasa RAo S/o Subba Rao 3 Vema Bala Venkata Ramana Rao 4 Vema Ramakrishna Rao S/o Subba Rao 5 Vema Seethamahalakshamma, W/o Subba Rao 6 Vema Manjula Rani D/o Subba Rao (Petitioners are Hindus and R/o Chivukulavari Street, Ongole) ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Arbitrator & District Collector under national Highway ACt, 1956 Collectors Office Ongole, Prakasam District. 2 The Competent Authority & Special Deputy Collector Under National Highway Act, 1956. C/o Collectors Office, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 national Highway Authority of India, Nellore rep by Project Director. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for records of the ﬁrst respondnet in A.C. No. 297 dated 4- 12-2006, and quash the said proceedigns by holding them as illegal and contrary to the provisions of national Highways Act, 1956 as amended in 2002 and consequentially direct the respondents to pay compensation to the acquired proeprty from the petitioners and pass such othr order or orders the Honourable Court deem fit. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.ADDEPALLI SURYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.S.VARMA (ADDL CGSC) The Court made the following : O R D E R: This Writ Petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners to issue a writ of certiorari to call for records of 1st respondent in A.C.No.297, dated 4.12.2006 and quash the said proceedings by holding them as illegal and contrary to the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 as amended in 2002 and consequently direct the respondents to pay adequate compensation to the acquired property. The properties owned by the petitioners came to be acquired under National Highways Act, 1956, as amended in 2002, in widening NH.5 in Prakasam District. The competent authority ﬁxed the compensation at Rs.3,000/- per square yard in addition to other beneﬁts. The petitioners dissatisﬁed with the quantum of compensation requested for referring the matter to the arbitrator as provided under clause 3G(5) of National Highways Act, 1956. Accordingly, the District Collector has been appointed as an arbitrator and the matter was referred to the District Collector for adjudication with regard to ﬁxing of proper compensation. The petitioners placed on record their claim statement. They also enclosed documents in support of their claims. The arbitrator proceeded to conﬁrm the rate ﬁxed by the competent authority by an order dated 4.12.2006. The order passed by the arbitrator is under challenge in this writ petition. Rule nisi came to be issued on 7.6.2007. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of 3rd respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the 1st respondent-arbitrator without considering the claim statement made by the petitioners and also the documents enclosed thereto proceeded to conﬁrm the market value ﬁxed by the competent authority and therefore it amounts to non- application of mind which is a valid ground to set aside the order impugned in this writ petition. To buttress his submission, learned counsel placed on record the claim statement ﬁled before the arbitrator. They also referred Xerox copies of registered documents dated 5.8.2004 to substantiate their claim that the market value ﬁxed by the competent authority is far below the market value. The arbitrator without referring to the claim statement and also the documents ﬁled along with the claim statement proceeded to conﬁrm the value ﬁxed by the competent authority. In my considered view, non-consideration of the material placed on record is valid ground to set aside the order impugned in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed setting aside the order impugned in this writ petition and the matter is remanded back to the Collector/Arbitrator to pass order afresh after giving due opportunity to both the parties. No costs. 4th September, 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) tnb ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.3397 OF 2007 4T H SEPTEMBER, 2008.