IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 3972 of 2008 Between: Gudise Narsimhulu, S/o. Late Gudia Narsanna, R/o. Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, LA Unit, R/o. Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 2 Dasinanna @ Pedda Thimmappa, S/o. Bheemanna, R/o. Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 3 Timmappa, s/o. Savari, R/o. Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 4 Urukundamma, w/o. Mukanna, R/o. Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENKATESH GUPTA Counsel for Respondent No.1: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No: 3972 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to refer the dispute to the civil Court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) in respect of Ac.11.01 guntas comprised in Sy.No.384 of Mittadoddi Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. The petitioner claims ownership and title in respect of the abovementioned land, which was acquired for public purpose, namely, Muchonipally Balancing Reservoir of Jawhar (Nettempad) Lift Irrigation Scheme. The grievance of the petitioner is that though respondent Nos.2 to 4 have no title over the property, they managed to get the names of respondent Nos.3 and 4 published in notification dated 09.04.2007 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act and respondent No.1 is not considering the petitioner’s claim made through legal notice dated 19.02.2008 got issued by him. A perusal of the record shows that there is already a dispute pending in O.S.No.208 of 2006 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Gadwal, between the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 in respect of the same property. Under Section 30 of the Act, if the Land Acquisition Officer is satisfied that a dispute exists regarding the entitlement or apportionment of the compensation, he shall refer the same to the civil Court of competent jurisdiction. Though the petitioner’s name is not shown in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, it is obligatory for respondent No.1 to consider his claim also as a person interested. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of without going into the merits of the case with the direction to respondent No.1 to consider the claim of the petitioner along with the claims of respondent Nos.2 to 4 and take appropriate decision thereon in the light of the observations made above. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.5187 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 26.02.2008 ES To 1.2CCs 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}