THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14747 of 2007 July 02, 2010 Between: Kalidindi Lakshmi, W/o.Venkata Subrahmanyeswara Raju … Petitioner And The District Collector, Visakhapatnam And another ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14747 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner’s land admeasuring 880 Sq.yards was acquired under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) by the State for public purpose, to wit., back up area for Gangavaram Port under Award No.1 of 2005, dated 25.7.2005. Petitioner alleges that she was not served with notice of award under Section 12(2) of the Act and in spite of enquiries, she was not informed. After she produced documents of title, she was paid Rs.1,29,517/- towards compensation, which she statedly accepted under protest. She then requested second respondent on 07.6.2007 to refer the matter to Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of compensation at Rs.4,000/- per Sq.yard. The same was endorsed vide R.C.No.155/02 S.D.T-II, dated 19.6.2007 but request for reference was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed instant writ petition seeking a Mandamus to second respondent to refer the matter to Civil Court. Second respondent filed counter affidavit. The acquisition of land for back up area of Gangavaram Port, passing of award etc., are admitted. However, insofar as writ claim is concerned, it is stated as under. In reply to the averments made in Paras 5 and 6 of the Petitioner’s affidavit it is submitted that the Petitioner has not filed application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking reference to the Civil Court within the period of limitation. It is further submitted that the land of the petitioner was unclaimed and it is only nearly 1½ years after passing of the Award, the petitioner has approached the Land Acquisition Officer claiming compensation for the land and the same was paid on 04.1.2007. As such there was no occasion to serve 12(2) Notices as the petitioner herself had not come forward during the Award enquiry and has only filed this application at a belated date. The petitioner has no made out any case warranting interference of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Petitioner filed reply affidavit denying counter averments. It is the case of petitioner that she got issued a legal notice dated 12.6.2007 in which she admits that she was paid compensation in a sum of Rs.1,29,517/- on 04.1.2007 by way of cheque No.351529 drawn on ING Vysya Bank vide proceedings in RC No.155/2002/SDT-II, dated 04.1.2007. Even if it is assumed that she had knowledge on that date, as per Section 18(2)(b) of the Act as amended by Andhra Pradesh (Amendment) Act No.20 of 1959, she ought to have made application seeking reference within two months thereafter, that is to say on or before 03.3.2007. Admittedly she sent representation on 07.6.2007 which is certainly barred by limitation enacted in the statute. Therefore this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned endorsement. The writ petition, for the above reasons, is dismissed. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) July 02, 2010 YS