THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.2586 of 2010 DATED: 08.07.2010 Between: Somalla Venkataiah .. Petitioner And The Special Deputy Collector (LA), JCRGLIP, Land Acquisition Unit at Jangaon, Warangal District. .. Respondent ORDER: Petitioner states that the respondent- Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), JCR-GLIP, Jangaon, proposed to acquire various extents of his lands situated in Sy.Nos.270, 271 and 272 of Chagallu Village, Ghanpur (Stn.) Mandal, Warangal Mandal, for public purpose, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). While so, it is his grievance that the extent of lands indicated in the notice dated 14.07.2008 issued by the respondent, under Section 9 (3) of the Act, requiring him and others to attend award enquiry, is less than the extent of lands being acquired from him actually and, therefore, he submitted a representation dated 04.12.2009 to the respondent, seeking to conduct survey of the said lands, and also got issued a legal notice dated 18.01.2010, but no action is taken so far. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondent produced the written instructions obtained by him from the respondent, wherein it is stated that the concerned surveyor has conducted survey of the lands proposed for acquisition, prepared sub-division records, which were scrutinized by the Deputy Inspector of Survey in the month of December 2007, and pursuant thereto draft notification and draft declaration were published and notices of award enquiry were issued. It is further stated that the petitioner did not produce any documentary evidence in support of his possession over the lands sought to be acquired, but after completion of award enquiry, he sent a legal notice stating that he is the absolute owner of the lands in Sy.Nos.270, 271 and 272 of Chagallu Village and no other person is having right or interest in the said lands and requested not to pay any amount of compensation in respect of the said lands to any other person. While so, one Burla Yadagiri and Burla Yellaiah have also sent a legal notice stating that they are in physical possession of the land in Sy.No.270 and the petitioner is trying to knock away the entire compensation amount and requested to refer the matter to Civil Court. In the circumstances, as there is a title dispute with regard to the subject lands, the draft award under Section 11 (1) of the Act has been submitted to the Special Collector, Land Acquisition, SRSP, SSP & JCR-GLIP, Hyderabad, and after passing the same, the compensation in respect of the lands in question will be deposited into Civil Court under Section 30 read with 31 (2) of the Act, for proper adjudication. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondent. The petitioner during the course of arguments admitted that there is dispute with regard to measurement of the land as also title. He however submits that the respondent, in the guise of having surveyed the land, is taking steps to pay the compensation to persons who do not have any title to the property. The respondent denied this contention of the petitioner, and it is submitted by him that after conducting survey of the land, the sub-division record was prepared and thereafter draft notification and draft declaration were issued notifying the acquisition of subject lands. He further stated that as there is title dispute with respect to the subject land, the matter would be referred to the civil Court, and upon the civil Court adjudicating the title dispute, he would pay compensation to the persons, who are held to be having title to the property. Admittedly, there appears to be a title dispute in respect of the subject land. As the respondent has taken a stand that since there is title dispute, he would refer the matter to the civil court for adjudication of the title dispute, and would pay compensation to the persons, who are held to be having title to the subject land, I am of the considered opinion that the apprehensions of the petitioner that the respondent would pay compensation to ineligible persons, would stand removed. Hence, no further orders need be passed in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly closed. No costs. ____________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 8th July, 2010 IBL