HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20169 of 2009 Dated: 27-01-2010 Between: Smt. Dharmula Mangamma & others. … Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Land Acquisition) & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20169 of 2009 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioners seek directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not considering their claim for award of compensation for the acquired land in an extent of Ac.5.19 cents covered by R.S.No.47, situated at Narlavaram village of Yelerupadu Mandal in Khammam District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioners that they are the children of one Madem Bazaaru, through his second wife. An extent of Ac.625.10 cents of land in Narlavaram village is notified for acquisition for Indrasagar Project, and the draft notification was published on 18th of October 2008. They claim that they are entitled for award of compensation in respect of Ac.5.19 cents, out of the land notified for acquisition. 3. In the counter filed on behalf of respondents, it is stated that in the revenue records, Madem Bazaaru’s name is notified as owner and possessor to an extent of Ac.5.19 cents, and the names of Madem Pullaiah and Madem Muneshwar Rao are recorded as owners and possessors to an extent of Ac.2.30 cents each, in Survey No.47. It is further stated that the writ petitioners have also filed claim petitions before the Land Acquisition Officer, stating that they are the children of Madem Bazaaru, through his second wife Chinna Muthamma. It is further stated that the matter is at the stage of Award and that the Award is not yet passed. Further, it is made clear in the counter that if at all there is any title dispute between the legal heirs of the original pattedar i.e. Madem Bazaaru, they will refer such dispute to the Civil Court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. 4. As much as no Award is passed so far, it cannot be said that respondents have not considered the claim petitions filed by the petitioners. Whether there exists any dispute with regard to the award of compensation for the subject land, is the matter to be considered by the Land Acquisition Officer during award inquiry. As much as no Award is passed so far, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to pass Award by considering the claim of petitioners also. It is made clear that if there is any title dispute over the land in question, it is open for the Land Acquisition Officer to refer such dispute to the Civil Court, under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. 5. Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 27th January 2010 ajr