IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16569 of 2005 Between: 1 Danabala @ Danaboina Krishnaiah S/o Late Appanna D. No. 9-121, Peda Madaka Post, RH Colony, Aganpudi-2 Visakhapatnam District 2 Penupothula Chellayamma W/o Late Tatalu Peda Madaka (Post & Village) D. No. 9-121, RH Colony, Agnampudi- 2, Visakhapatnam District 3 Chilla Rajeswramma D/o Late Chilla Appaklaswamy Reddy Sector II, RHC., Visakhapatnam District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Parwada Mandal, Parwada, Visakhapatnam District .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.G.RAMA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in occupying land admeasuring Acs.25.00 in Survey Nos.32/1, 32/2 and 32/3 of Marripalem Village, Parwada Mandal without initiating proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a mandatory direction to the respondents to initiate proceedings under the Act. At the hearing, Sri G.Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though the petitioners were assigned different extents of lands out of the above mentioned land on 25.02.1980, without acquiring the same, the respondents dispossessed them for the purpose of accommodating the displaced persons from “FORMACITY” developed by the Government in Parwada Mandal. Though no counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition submitted that if the lands were genuinely assigned to the petitioners, they are entitled to payment of ex gratia in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.01.1993. The learned counsel for the petitioners fairly conceded to this extent. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: (1) Within four weeks from today, the petitioners shall make representations to respondent No.1 enclosing copies of DKT pattas for claiming ex gratia in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1307, dated 23.01.1993. (2) Within four weeks from the date of receipt of the representations, respondent No.1 shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners during which the petitioners shall produce original DKT Pattas. (3) If respondent No.1 is satisfied that the petitioners were granted DKT pattas, he shall fix appropriate ex gratia amount in respect of each of the lands of the petitioners covered by the DKT pattas and make arrangement for payment of the said amount and in the event the petitioners fail to produce the original DKT pattas or respondent No.1 is not satisfied about their genuineness, he shall pass a reasoned order for rejecting the claims of the petitioners for payment of ex gratia. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.21063 of 2005 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 22nd JULY, 2008. Note: issue c.c. in one week. B/o kvni