IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN WRIT PETITION No.27283 2011 Between: V.Vijaya Saradhy. … Petitioner And The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Unit-III, ORR, HMDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad. … Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy. Counsel for the respondent: Sri Ravindra Yanamandra. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in acquiring the house plots bearing Nos.171/B and 171/C, admeasuring 125 Sq. yards each, in Survey Nos.560 and 561 of Ghatkesar village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and passing Award, dated 22-1-2009, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondent to give him an opportunity to file his objections for fixation of the compensation. At the hearing, Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as the plots, which are acquired by the respondent, were notified in the names of the original owners, as per the revenue records as they stood in the year 1982, and the property has changed several hands, his client was not aware of initiation of the land acquisition proceedings and passing of the award; and that, therefore, he could not participate in the award enquiry and file his claim petition. The learned counsel further pointed out that, even according to the respondent, there were no claimants for plot Nos.171/B and 171/C, but still the respondent has referred the dispute to civil court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”). Sri Ravindra Yanamandra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent, fairly conceded that the occasion for the respondent to refer the dispute to the civil court under Section 30 of the Act does not exist as, even according to the award, no one had submitted his claim petition in respect of various plots, including Plot Nos.171/B and 171/C. He further stated that so far the amount has not been deposited and that the respondent is prepared to examine the claim of the petitioner and make payment if the latter produces documents of title before the respondent. Having regard to the above submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of in the following terms: 1) Within four weeks from today, the petitioner shall file a claim petition before the respondent along with documents of title; 2) within four weeks thereafter, the respondent shall give a notice to the petitioner and decide on his claim; and 3) if the respondent is satisfied that the petitioner is the lawful owner of the above mentioned two plots, he shall pay the compensation to him. Conversely, if the respondent finds that the petitioner is not the lawful owner, he shall pass an appropriate order and communicate the same to the petitioner. As a sequel, interim order dated 29-9-2011 is vacated and WPMP No.33676 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. --------------------------------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:08-11-2011 MNR