IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 10465 of 2001 Between: Bandi Krishna Reddy S/o.Ramana Reddy R/o.Penubarthi, Rapur Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Near RTC Bus Stand, Nellore. 3 The Special Dy.Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore, Neelagiri Sangham, Mulapet, Nellore. 4 The Sirasthadar, In the Court of the Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Gudur, Nellore. .....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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents in not referring the name of the petitioner to the competent Civil Court i.e., Prl.Sr.Civil Judge Court, Gudur for adjudication of the dispute regarding the title and pay compensation relating to the land in Sy.No.239 Extent 2- 75 cents in Penubarthy Village, Rapur Mandal, Nellore District is arbitrary, illegal, inviolation of the Award RCA 899/90, dt. 25.3.91 and also inviolation of Sec.31 of the Land Acquisition Act and consequently direct the respondents to refer the name of the petitioner to the competent Civil Court as per the Award No.RCA 899/90, dt. 25.3.91 for adjudication of the dispute regarding title and pay compensation and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.CKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10465 of 2001 ORDER: The petitioner filed instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus directing respondents to refer award - RCA No.899 of 1990 dated 25.03.1991 passed under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, LA Act) under for adjudication of dispute regarding title and for a further direction to pay compensation. An extent of Acs.33.67 land was acquired by Government for Kandleru Reservoir of Telugu Ganga Project. Petitioner is allegedly owner of land admeasuring Acs.2.75 out of Acs.7.55 in survey No.239 situated at Penubarthy Village, Rapur Mandal, Nellore District. After following due process under LA Act, award was passed. As there is a dispute regarding entitlement and apportionment of compensation for land in said survey number, amount was kept in civil Court deposit under Section 31 of LA Act. . The matter was referred to civil Court, but name of petitioner was not mentioned in the reference. Civil Court considered L.A.O.P.No.24 of 1994 and by judgment dated 28.04.2000 decided the matter. He alleges that judgment of civil Court is collusive one as all respondents therein were made ex parte due to manipulation of one Bandi Penchal Reddy, a resident of said Village. Therefore, petitioner filed instant writ petition. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, based on the instructions, submits that initially when the reference was sent under Section 30 of LA Act in 1991, name of petitioner was not mentioned as one of claimants. Civil Court returned the reference as defective. Therefore, the same was resubmitted on 04.07.1991, but name of petitioner was deleted. Civil Court decided the reference determining Bandi Penchal Reddy as owner. Thereafter entire compensation was paid to him. A perusal of the affidavit accompanying writ petition would show that immediately after passing of award, amount was deposited in civil Court under Section 31 of LA Act. When reference was made in 1991, name of petitioner was not shown. Even though petitioner was not added as party to said reference and even though he was aware of reference, he kept quite till civil Court delivered judgment on 28.04.2000. He ultimately filed instant writ petition on 21.05.2001. When once reference is made, even if a person’s name is not found in reference, such person can file an application to implead in civil Court as held by a Larger Bench this Court in Repaka Bhyravamurthy v. Muppidi Venkataraju[1]. Having not done so, petitioner cannot seek a Mandamus from this Court. Claim is barred by delay and laches. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 25th February, 2008 GHN To 1 The Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Near RTC Bus Stand, Nellore. 3 The Special Dy.Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore, Neelagiri Sangham, Mulapet, Nellore. 4 The Sirasthadar, In the Court of the Prl.Sr.Civil Judge, Gudur, Nellore. 5. 2CCs to GP for Land Acquisition 6. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MADHURI} K.Venkatesam. [1] 2001 (5) ALD 815 (LB)