IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.5322 OF 2005 DATED:17.03.2011 Between: Surapureddy Mangayamma and others… Petitioners And The District Collector East Godavari District at Kakinada … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO.5322 OF 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not disposing of the representation of the petitioners dt.6.11.2002, as arbitrary and illegal. It is the case of the petitioners that they are cultivating tenants of the lands of the fourth respondent deity in extents of Ac.1.20 cents in R.S. No.19/2, 0.74 cents in R.S. No.19/2-20 and 0.98 cents in R.S. No.19/2 of Sandipudi Village, Alamuru Mandal, East Godavari District. The said lands were acquired under the land acquisition proceedings. Previously the petitioners filed W.P. No.15242 of 2002 against the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioners’ tenancy rights and this Court by order dt.8.10.2002 disposed of the said writ petition holding that the temple lands of the fourth respondent can also be acquired for the public purpose and if the petitioners are having any tenancy rights, it is open for them to participate in the award proceedings before the Sub-Collector, East Godavari District, at Rajahmundry and put their claims pursuant to the notice issued by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) and if any such claim is made, it is for the LAO to consider and pass appropriate orders. Thereafter, the petitioners made a representation dt.6.11.2002 stating that they have no information whether any award proceedings are pending or disposed of in respect of the land acquisition proceedings and if the award is already passed it can be treated as a claim petition filed under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. As there is no action on the parts of the respondents, this writ petition is filed. The respondents 1 to 3 have filed counter affidavit stating that the lands in extents of Ac.0.42 cents in S. No.1/4; Ac.3.64 in S. No.19/2; Ac.0.24 in S. No.20 and Ac.1.25 in S. No.1/5 of Sandhipudi Village belonging to Sri Venugopalaswamy vari Devasthanam – respondent No.4 and Sri Ramulammavari Devasthanam were proposed for acquisition for providing house sites to the weaker sections, that draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act were published in 1999 and the LAO conducted award enquiry by issuing public notice under Sections 9(1), 10 and 9(3) of the Act in form 6 and 7 which were published in the village on 9.3.1999 and while taking possession of the land, the LAO has paid 80% of the land value compensation to the Executive Officer, Sri Venugopalaswamy varu and Sri Ramulammavaru Temples. Accordingly, the land was handed over to the Additional Revenue Inspector, Alamuru, under cover of panchanama. When the petitioners and their men tried to enter into the land for ploughing, the Panchayat Secretary, Sandhipudi, who was given control over the land, made a complaint to the Station House Officer, Alamuru, who registered a case in Crime No.75 of 2002 under Section 447 of IPC. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed this writ petition. The petitioners are not at all tenants of the land but they had continued possession as encroachers and they are chronic defaulters in paying maktha to the deity. This Court also in W.P. No.15242 of 2002, dt.8.10.2002, observed that if the petitioners are aggrieved of the compensation if any awarded by the LAO, they are at liberty to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act to the Civil Court for enhancement and apportionment of the compensation. It is stated that the LAO has already deposited Rs.5,36,640/- towards 80% of the compensation to the person-in-management of the deity vide cheque dt.18.7.2002 and the petitioners are not eligible for any apportionment of the compensation as they are only encroachers of the land and they never paid maktha to the Executive Officer of the temple. It is further stated that as the land under acquisition is endowment land and the market value of the land has to be finalized by the State level Committee and it is still to be finalized, award is yet to be passed and that while passing the award in the case, the request of the petitioners will be considered as directed by this Court in its order dt.8.10.2002 in W.P. No.15242 of 2002. The counter affidavit on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 was filed on 18.4.2005. Now, either the counsel for respondents 1 to 3 or the counsel for the respondent No.4 is able to submit anything about the subsequent events, if any, took place. The limited grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is only to consider and dispose of their representation dt.6.11.2002, if not already disposed of. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing that if award in the matter is not yet passed, the petitioners’ representation dt.6.11.2002 may be considered and disposed of by the respondent authorities in accordance with law while passing the award. If already Award is passed, it is for the petitioners to workout their remedies. No costs. _______________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 17.3.2011 bnr