IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTHDAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.27191 OF 2006 Between: Bomma Kalavathi ......petitioner AND 1. The Revenue Divisional officer, W.G.District. 2. The Mandal Revenue Officer, W.G.District. 3. The Executive Engineer, W.G.District. 4. The Assistant Director of Horticulture,W.G.District. 5. TheDistrict Collector, W.G.District. ......Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: C.C.S.Sastry Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following:- ORDER: This Court ordered Rule Nisi on 29.12.2006 W.P.M.P.No.15712 of 2009 was filed, wherein the additional affidavit along with additional material documents in support of the writ petition had been submitted. This Court by order dated 14-07- 2009, allowed the said application. Though, the matter is appearing under the caption for interlocutory, the learned counsel representing the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition made a request for final disposal of the writ petition itself, and hence the writ petition itself is being finally disposed of by this Court. 2. The petitioner filed the writ petition for a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate direction declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents in not passing award in respect of lands acquired having palm-oil trees for the purpose of Kovvada Kalava Reservoir and Left Main Canal in respect of petitioner’s land of a total extent of Ac.5-26 cents in R.S.Nos. 542/1 and 542/2B of L.N.D.Peta Village, Polavaram Mandal, West Godavari District, as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to make interim award at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per acre of Palm-Oil yielding trees to the petitioner and pass such other orders. 3. The averments in detail were made in paras 2 to 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. However, an additional affidavit along with additional material documents had been submitted in W.P.M.P.No.15712 of 2009, which was allowed by this Court as already aforesaid. The third respondent filed counter affidavit. It is stated by the writ petitioner that prior to the acquisition, the petitioner raised Palm oil gardens and there are 427 trees, out of which Oil yielding trees were 210 in an extent of Ac.4-27 cents in Sy.No.542/1. Like wise, there are also 42 Oil yielding Palm oil trees in Sy.No.542/2B and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the compensation of total 252 Palm oil trees from the respondents. Further it is stated that, at the time of acquisition, adjacent to the above mentioned lands, the petitioner also is having agricultural lands and supply of water to the Palm oil trees was through bore well, which was dug long back in his agricultural lands. The respondents at the time of passing the award has not taken into consideration the bore well and had not paid any compensation to that effect. Further it is stated that upon perusal of the award passed by the respondents in the year 2002, valuation of agriculture lands were classified into four categories as follows:- Category-I Cultivable land with Rs.90,000/- p.a., Garden and bore. To Rs.1,00,000/-p.a., Category-II Cultivable land with only Rs.85,000/-p.a., Gardens without bore to 90,000/- p.a., Category-III Cultivable land with only bore -do- Category-IV Cultivable land without any Rs.65,000/- p.a., To Rs.75,000/- 4. As seen from the above valuation of lands, the petitioner is entitled for the compensation under Category-I i.e., cultivable land with palm oil garden and bore. It is also stated that the 4th respondent after spot inspection conducted by him during the time of acquisition of land, issued a Plantation Certificate dated 04-08- 2001, stating that there are 427 palm oil Plants, which were planted in the year 1995, in the Survey No.542 of L.N.D.Peta Village, belonging to the petitioner. A Certificate issued by the third respondent dated 21-07-2001, would prove that there were about 210 Oil Palm Trees in the land to an extent of Ac.4-85 Cents in Survey No.542, which belonged to the petitioner. The said Certificate confirms that the said Oil Palm trees were cut and removed for the purpose of Dam work. Further another Certificate dated 28-09-2004 was issued by the 2nd respondent, confirms that there are about 210 Palm Oil Trees in an extent of Ac4-27 cents in Survey No.542/1 and about 47 Palm Oil Trees in Survey No.542/2B in an extent of Land admeasuring Ac.0-99 cents, belonging to the petitioner. A letter under reference in ROC.A2/2002 dated 26-12-2002 addressed to the first respondent by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovvur requesting to pass a supplementary award in respect of Palmyrah trees also had been placed and disproves no compensation was paid in respect of the existing palm oil trees in the land acquired. Yet another letter under reference Roc. (A) 2/2001 dated 21-05- 2002 from the office of the R.D.O.,Kovvur, addressed to the 4th respondent also had been placed before the Court, which would go to show that fourth respondent was asked to send the estimated value of the Palm oil trees, for the purpose of passing the award. Further two letters, one under reference Roc. No./2002/C dated 12-08- 2004 and another under reference No.265/2002/C dated 09-05-2003, from the first respondent to fourth respondent also had been placed before this Court. The proceedings in D.D is Roc.No.SA/353/2002 dated 27-01-2003 also had been placed before this Court and several further details also had been narrated. Thus, the details and the particulars relating to these trees had been elaborated at paras 7 and 8 of the additional affidavit filed before this Court. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated that for the purpose of construction of Kovvada Kalva Reservoir Phase-I and for Left main Canal dam, in respect of the petitioner’s land of an extent of Ac.5-26 cents in R.S.No.542/1 and 542/2B of L.N.D.Peta Village, Polavaram Mandal, West Godavari District was acquired for formation of earth dam and for excavation of left Main Canal with Palm Oil Tree through Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District. Further, it is stated that for construction of Kovvada Kalava Project, an extent of Ac.4.27 cents with 210 Nos. of Palm Oil Trees in R.s.No.542/1 and an extent of Ac.0.99 cents with 42 Nos of Palm Oil Trees in R.S.No.542/2B had been acquired for formation of earth dam and left main canal. The above Palm Oil Trees were removed during the execution of the project work. The competent authority for payment of compensation for land, trees, structures etc., is the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddygudem. With regard to valuation of plam Oil trees is the fourth respondent-Assistant Director of Horticulture, Eluru who may have to value the same. An amount of Rs.5,73,27,600/- had been deposited with the Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddygudem/the first respondent from time to time in six spells for payment of compensation towards land, trees, structures and implementation of R and R Package etc. Hence, timely action was already taken by the third respondent on behalf of Irrigation Department for payment of compensation. This stand taken by the third respondent. 6. It is needless to say that the fourth respondent-Assistant Director of Horticulture, Eluru, West Godavari District, may have to estimate the valuation of the Palm Oil trees even as per the stand taken in the counter affidavit. Further it is needless to say that the competent authority for payment of compensation is the first respondent/the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddigudem Mandal, West Godavari District. In the light of the same, let the fourth respondent estimate the value of the trees at an early date, preferably, within a period of four weeks and forward the same to the first respondent and let the first respondent take an appropriate decision further, within a period of four weeks thereafter without fail, inasmuch as there is already delay in finalizing the compensation in this regard in favour of the petitioner. 7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ P. S. NARAYANA, J 7th August 2009 ivd/pnv