IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25640 of 2002 Between: K. Satya Surya Venkateswara Rao S/o Varahalu R/o Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam. 2 A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Rep. by its Zonal Manager, APIIC, Industrial Estate, Visakhapatnam. 3 Collector, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.LAKSHMANA SARMA Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 3: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Heard Sri M.Lakshmana Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.1 and 3 and perused the record. In his affidavit, the petitioner claimed that the land of an extent of Acs.7.01 cents in Survey Nos.108, 109 and 122 of Duvvada Village, Gajuvaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, was acquired by the respondents for Visakhapatnam Steel Plant Project for providing rail facility, under Award Nos.11 of 1982 and 1 of 1983, dated 29.06.1982 and 22.02.1983 respectively and a sum of Rs.39,703/- was paid towards compensation for the said land. The petitioner pleaded that since the said land was no longer required, the same was re-conveyed in favour of the petitioner’s father Sri K.Varahalu on his repaying the amount of Rs.39,703/- towards the land value. He further pleaded that a layout was prepared by his father and got the same approved; that on 04.11.2002, his father died and that when he wanted to lay a road in Survey No.108/5, respondent No.2 objected to the same on the ground that the land admeasuring Ac.0.51 cents comprised in Survey Nos.108 and 109 was given to the Corporation and the petitioner has no right over the same. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3, Sri D.Subhas Chandra Bose, Special Grade Deputy Collector, LA, Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam District stated that the lands admeasuring Acs.3.49 cents comprised in Survey Nos.108/1, 2, 3, 4B, 5, 8, 9, 122/1 and 4 and Acs.4.03 cents comprised in Survey No.109/1 to 12 belonging to the father of the petitioner were acquired under Award Nos.1 of 1983 and 11 of 1982, dated 22.02.1983 and 29.06.1982 respectively; that Rs.8,027/- and Rs.38,804.45 ps. were awarded under the said two awards respectively and paid to the petitioner’s father and that under the re-conveyance proceedings, dated 18.12.1985, what was re-conveyed was only the land admeasuring Acs.7.01 cents after receiving the sum of Rs.39,703/- from the father of the petitioner and, therefore, the balance of land admeasuring Ac.0.51 cents, which was not re-conveyed, was transferred to respondent No.2 vide order, dated 24.12.1991 passed by the Government. No reply affidavit controverting the said averments contained in the counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioner. A perusal of proceedings, dated 18.12.1985 filed by the petitioner clearly supports the stand taken by respondent Nos.1 and 3 in their counter-affidavit that what was re-conveyed was only the land admeasuring Acs.7.01 cents. The petitioner has not denied the fact that the total extent of land acquired under the above-mentioned two awards was Acs.7.52 cents. Therefore, the petitioner cannot make any legitimate claim over the balance of land admeasuring Ac.0.51 cents, which was not re- conveyed to the father of the petitioner. From out of Rs.46,831.45ps evidently received by the father of the petitioner, he refunded the sum of Rs.39,703/- being the proportionate value of land admeasuring Acs.7.01 cents and got the said extent re- conveyed. Therefore, the petitioner failed to make out the case of infringement of any of his rights by respondent No.2. The writ petition is, hence, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, interim order, dated 23.01.2003 is vacated, WPMP.No.32378 of 2002 is dismissed and WVMP.No.1472 of 2005 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 24th JULY, 2008. kvni