THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.22760 of 2010 BETWEEN: Mamidi Kondaiah Gari Obul Reddy @ Obul Reddy PETITIONER And 1. The Special Deputy Collector (L.A) T.G.P. Unit-II, Mamillapalli, Kadapa, and others. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Boya Ravinder Reddy Counsel for the respondents: G.P. for L.A. The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner, whose land and structures have been acquired and in whose favour award has been passed for payment of compensation, has filed this writ petition challenging the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation amount, as illegal. The undisputed facts are that the land and structures belonging to the petitioner were acquired for the purpose of foreshore submersion of Somasila Project in the year 1995. An Award No.5/1995 dated 31.08.1995 was passed awarding compensation for structures. It is stated that at the instance of other claimants, a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) was made to the civil Court in LAOP No.248 to 250 of 2000 on the file of the District Judge, Kadapa. The reference Court enhanced the compensation by 100% and directed to pay the same with all the statutory benefits. On appeal preferred by the 1st respondent in A.S.No.449 of 2004, this Court reduced the compensation from 100% to 80%. The petitioner did not seek any reference under Section 18 of the Act. However, after the compensation was enhanced as stated above, he preferred an application to the 1st respondent under Section 28-A of the Act and the same was allowed by Award No.1/2007 dated 11.01.2008. Although, the petitioner was the land owner and compensation has been awarded in his favour, the amount has not been paid on account of a prohibitory order dated 11.02.2008 issued in E.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 in O.S.No.38 of 2001 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Sidhout. It appears, the said O.S.No.38 of 2001 was filed by one Kondareddi Subba Reddy against one Mamidi Obul Reddy, who is said to be the son of the petitioner, for recovery of money. Since the compensation amount has not been paid, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the aforesaid relief. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Various grounds have been raised contending that the defendant in the suit, namely, Mamidi Obul Reddy is the son of the petitioner. Incidentally both of them bear the same name and therefore on account of the mistake in identity, the respondents were not ready to make the payment. In any event, the said E.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 were dismissed for default by orders dated 2.05.2008 and the same has become final. It is therefore, contended that the objection taken by the respondents no longer exists. The 1st respondent Special Deputy Collector has filed a counter affidavit. He has not disputed the entitlement of the petitioner but the only objection taken in that regard is that the amounts could not be paid only because of the prohibitory orders in the aforesaid E.Ps. A perusal of the orders in E.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 in O.S.No.38 of 2001 dated 2.05.2008 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Sidhout would show that the Execution Petitions filed by the plaintiff were dismissed. It appears that the said dismissal orders have become final and the plaintiff has not instituted fresh Execution Petitions. If that be so, there cannot be any objection for the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioners. In the circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to take appropriate steps for payment of compensation to the petitioner as early as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 1st April, 2011 Js.