IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No : 22910 of 1998 Between: 1 Peeta Subba Rao, (DIED), S/o. China Punnaiah, R/o. Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2 Peeta Chaitanya Sai Murari, S/o. Late Peeta Madhusudhan, W/o. J.Sudha Rathnakar, R/o. Visweswara Estates, Main Road, Vijayawada, Krishna District. (Brought on record as LR of deceased sole Petitioner Vide Court Order dated 11-3-05 in WPMP 1169/2005) ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Secretary (Land Reforms), Revenue Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariate Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not passing award for payment of compensation for the petitioner's land of an extent of Ac 8-18 cents covered by Sy.Nos. 901/5, 918/9, 902/3, 892/2A and 892/1 of Kaja Village, Movva Mandal, Krishna District, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the orders of this Hon'ble Court, and direct the respondent authorities to ﬁx the compensation for the said lands by passing an award basing on market value after conducting enquiry, as per the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, and as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No.5224/95 dt. 27-1-97. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No : 22910 of 1998 O R D E R: The present Writ Petition is ﬁled aggrieved by the action of the Respondents in not passing an Award for payment of compensation in respect of the Writ Petitioner’s lands being an extent of Acs.8.18 cents in Sy.Nos.901/5, 918/9, 902/3, 892/2A and 892/1 of Kaja Village, Movva Mandal, Krishna District. The Writ Petitioner died during the pendency of this Writ Petition and Petitioner No.2 herein was brought on record as the Legal Representative of the deceased Writ Petitioner, vide order dated 11-03-2005 in W.P.M.P.No.1169 of 2005 in W.P.No.22910 of 1998. The admitted facts of the case are that the above said lands were taken possession of by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in connection with the proceedings initiated under the A.P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short ‘the Act of 1973’). Thereafter, the land ceiling authorities, having determined the correct position, came to the conclusion that the said lands were not held in excess of the standard holding permissible to the Writ Petitioner and his family members and accordingly, the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, by its order dated 31-12-1990 in C.C.No.2988/1/D/88, declared that the Writ Petitioner was a non-surplus holder under the Act of 1973. Thereupon, the Writ Petitioner made a representation to the authorities to redeliver the subject land of Acs.8.18 cents and being aggrieved by their inaction in this regard, he ﬁled W.P.No.5224 of 1995 before this Court seeking retransfer of the said lands. A Division Bench of this Court, by its order dated 27-01-1997, held that the authorities were bound to surrender/transfer the subject lands or its value to the Petitioner, in case assignment had been made of the said land in favour of third parties. The Division Bench disposed of the Writ Petition directing the authorities to restore the subject land, if it was still available and if it was not assigned to others. The Division Bench also stated to the eﬀect that if the subject lands were already assigned to others, then the Respondent authorities were to determine the value of the lands under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act of 1894’) as on the date of taking over possession of the lands and to pay compensation including solatium, interest etc., within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. The complaint of the Writ Petitioner before this Court in the present Writ Petition was that the District Collector, Krishna District, Machilipatnam, the second Respondent herein, ﬁxed the compensation for the lands unilaterally at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per acre for an extent of Acs.2.48 cents, at Rs.5,000/- per acre for an extent of Acs.4.13 cents and at Rs.6,000/- per acre for an extent of Acs.1.57 cents and paid a total compensation of Rs.3,12,505/-. The Writ Petitioner stated to the eﬀect that the said amount was received under protest on 06- 09-1997. The Petitioner also stated that he made representations to the second Respondent on 19-09- 1997 and 13-10-1997 to ﬁx the compensation as per market value, but the authorities have not taken any action in this regard. The Writ Petitioner alleged that the market value of the subject land even in the year 1980 was more than Rs.75,000/- per acre. He complained that the said land was a double crop wet land and the value thereof has been ﬁxed without taking the relevant factors into consideration. He also complained that the procedure under the Act of 1894, which was directed to be followed as per the order in W.P.No.5224 of 1995, has not been adopted in ﬁxing the value of the land. He alleged that no notice or opportunity was given to him in the process of ﬁxation of the value of his lands by the second Respondent. Being aggrieved by the manner in which the second Respondent went about ﬁxing of the value of his lands, as aforestated, the Petitioner had approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition. The Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, being the third Respondent in the Writ Petition, ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit on behalf of the Respondents. Therein, it is stated that the market value of the subject lands was ﬁxed on the basis of the registration statistics collected in respect of the lands in the vicinity of the subject lands. The land value of Rs.75,000/- per acre claimed by the Petitioner is denied. The counter aﬃdavit further states that the earlier order of this Court in W.P.No.5224 of 1995 did not direct the authorities to initiate proceedings afresh under the Act of 1894 by issuing a notiﬁcation under Section 4(1) thereof. Accordingly, the Respondents stated that there was no necessity for them to pass an award and they would submit that they have determined the value of the subject lands under the provisions of the Act of 1894 and paid compensation to the Petitioner including solatium, interest etc. It is admitted that no award enquiry was conducted but the Respondents would have it that they were not required to conduct such an enquiry. They accordingly prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition. Heard Sri G.Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the Respondents. Once the Respondent authorities were not in a position to return the subject lands to the Petitioner as directed by a Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 27-01-1997 in W.P.No.5224 of 1995, the only option available to them was to pay the value of the said lands to the Writ Petitioner. So far as the assessment of the value of the said lands is concerned, this Court in W.P.No.5224 of 1995 mandated that the Respondent authorities should determine the value of the land under the Act of 1894 as on the date of taking over possession of the subject lands. The direction was also to the eﬀect that compensation payable to the Petitioner included solatium, interest etc. It is an admitted fact that the possession of the subject lands was taken under the Act of 1973 on 22-06-1980. The issue in the present Writ Petition is whether the Respondent authorities were correct in their approach in assessing the value of the subject lands. According to the Learned Government Pleader, the Respondents were not required to follow the procedure laid down in the Act of 1894 including holding of an award enquiry. On the other hand, Sri G.Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the Petitioner strenuously argued that the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.5224 of 1995 required the Respondent authorities to adhere to the procedure laid down in the Act of 1894 and denial of an opportunity to the Writ Petitioner in the process of ﬁxation of the market value of the land constitutes a clear violation of such procedure. Having considered the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel and the material on record, this Court is of the opinion that the earlier order dated 27- 01-1997 in W.P.No.5224 of 1995 did not leave any scope for discretion of the Respondent authorities as to the manner in which the value of the subject lands was to be determined. This Court categorically directed that such determination should be made under the Act of 1894 with reference to the date of taking over possession of the lands. No doubt, the possession of the lands was taken under the Act of 1973 and the same is not traceable to the provisions of the Act of 1894. However, the fact remains that the Writ Petitioner has been deprived of his lands owing to the wrong determination of his permissible holding under the Act of 1973. In that respect, depriving the Writ Petitioner of his lands partakes the nature of a coercive State action and accordingly, he would be entitled in law to be compensated for the same. Otherwise, it would amount to violation of the constitutional right of the Writ Petitioner under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. That is the reason why this Court, in the earlier Writ Petition No.5224 of 1995, safeguarded his lawful interest by directing that he should be compensated by following the procedure laid down under the Act of 1894. The Respondent authorities ought to have initiated steps under the Act of 1894 with respect to holding of an award enquiry under Section 11 of the said Act and followed the procedure prescribed therein with regard to the later steps to be taken. The failure of the Respondent authorities in this regard clearly violates the mandate of this Court in W.P.No.5224 of 1995. Consequently, the unilateral ﬁxation of the value of the Petitioner’s lands admeasuring Acs.8.18 cents in Sy.Nos. 901/5, 918/9, 902/3, 892/2A and 892/1 of Kaja Village, Movva Mandal, Krishna District, is illegal and unsustainable. The said proceedings are accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Respondent authorities to undertake a proper determination of the value of the said lands by duly following the procedure laid down in the Act of 1894. This would require them to issue notice to the Petitioner No.2, having due regard for the fact that the Writ Petitioner died pendente lite, with regard to holding of an award enquiry under Section 11 of the Act, allow the Petitioner No.2 to participate in the said enquiry by submitting evidence in support of the land value claimed by him and thereafter, ﬁx the market value in accordance with law in the form of an award passed under the Act of 1894. This would enable the Petitioner No.2, if he is dissatisﬁed with such ﬁxation, to initiate proceedings for enhancement under the provisions of the Act of 1894 itself. Needless to state, the amounts already paid to the Petitioners in pursuance of the ﬁxation of market value undertaken earlier shall be adjusted as against the amounts which may be payable under the determination to be undertaken in pursuance of this order. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ P.V.SANJAY KUMAR,J Date: 18-09-2008 KLP