IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO :14640 of 2006 Between: Atike Ramu & another .....PETITIONER AND 1 State of A.P rep by the Collector (Land Acquisition) Kakinada & two others. .....RESPONDENTs This Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO :14640 of 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to refer the matter to the Civil Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) for determination of just and reasonable compensation for the lands acquired (Ac.0.85 cents of land in S.No:467/3C and Ac.0.50 cents in S.No:468/2 of Tatagunta village, Tuni mandal, East Godavari District. Heard the learned counsel and perused the entire material available on record. The case of the petitioners is that the Government had acquired the lands of the petitioners for the purpose of laying National High way, which passed through out the lands in Tetagunta village. The Government acquired Ac.0.85 cents of land of the 1st petitioner in S.No:467/3C along with 20 mango trees which were yielding good return and also Ac.0.50 cents of land of the 2nd petitioner in S.No:468/2 along with R.C.C building, borewell, A.C shed along with 55 coconut trees and 90 teak trees. The Government paid the compensation at the rate of Rs.72,120/- and Rs.1,61,006/-. Before the payment, they were asked to attend the M.R.O office, Tuni to receive the compensation amount of Rs.1,54,456/- and Rs.62,984/- and accordingly, they went to the M.R.O office on 25.7.2002 and received the payments under protest. After receiving the payments, they submitted a representation to the Collector to refer the matter for checking the measurements made. But, there was no response. After seeing the publication made in Andhra Bhoomi, a telugu daily dated 4.3.2002, they filed their objections. Thereafter, the compensation amount was unilaterally fixed and therefore, they sent their protest letter dated 10.1.2003 and 1.3.2003 by registered post with acknowledgment due. It is their further case that the market value of the land is Rs.3,40,000/- per acre and the value of the mango trees (30 trees), cashew nut (15 trees) and teak trees (6 trees) is Rs.50,000/-, Rs.30,000/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively totaling Rs.5,25,000/-. Similarly, the value of the land of the 2nd petitioner is Rs.2,00,000/- per acre and the value of the bore well pipes etc., coconut trees (30 trees) and boreshed etc. is Rs.96,000/-, 60,000/- and 1,80,000/- respectively totaling Rs.5,51,000/-. As the petitioners are not satisfied with the amount awarded, they sent a registered notice dated 16.6.2004 to the respondents requesting them to refer the matter to the Civil Court under the provisions of section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. A reply was sent by the respondents stating that as the petitioners were paid the compensation basing on the Basic Value Register and also the assessment of Forest Department, they are not entitled for any more compensation. Hence, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioners. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the payment of compensation is not in accordance with law for the acquisition of the lands of the petitioners and in fact, they are entitled for more compensation and that on the representation made by the petitioners to the District Collector seeking to pay more compensation, the same has not been considered and therefore, they have filed the present writ petition. Playing reliance on the notice issued by the office of the District Collector, Kakinada, dated 3.4.2007 wherein it is stated that the petitioners had made a representation for enhancement of compensation, for which they are required to place relevant documentary evidence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are entitled for re determination of compensation by way of enhancement of the awarded amount. At this juncture, it is submitted by the learned G.P that this matter does not come under the purview of the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and that this issue has to be dealt with under the provisions of National High Way Act, under which, the District Collector is an arbitrator to determine the value of the land. Therefore, it is for the District Collector alone to re determine the value of the land basing on the evidence adduced by the petitioners. In this regard, the learned G.P has drawn the attention of this Court to clause 5 of section 3 (g) of the National High way Act, 1956, which contemplates as under: “If the amount determined by the competent authority under sub section (1) or sub section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government.” Section 3 (a) of the National High ways Act deals with the competent authority. Basing on the said provision, it is submitted by the learned G.P that the District Collector being arbitrator is empowered to re determine the compensation for enhancement of compensation. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the above provisions and in view of the pendency of the representation of the petitioners with the authorities, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I feel it just and proper to direct the 1st respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioners for enhancement of compensation in respect of the lands admeasuring Ac.085 cents situated in S.No:467/3C and Ac.0.50 cents in S.No:468/2 at Tetakunta village, Tuni Mandal, East Godavari District and pass appropriate orders within two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice G.Chandraiah gurc THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO :14640 of 2006 23rd December, 2009