HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25739 of 2006 Date: 22.10.2010 Between : J. Sailaja & another. …….Petitioners And The District Collector, Chittoor District & others. ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25739 of 2006 ORDER : Although interlocutory matters are listed for hearing, at the request of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition itself is taken up for hearing. In this writ petition, the petitioners seek for directions by way of Mandamus, directing the respondents to acquire their land in Sy.Nos.59 and 60, admeasuring Ac.9.71 cents, situated at Pullur village of S.R.Puram Mandal in Chittoor District, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. An extent of Ac.2.40 cents of land in Sy.No.59 and about 86 cents of land in Sy.No.60/2 belonging to the petitioners, was notified for acquisition under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, on the requisition from the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, for construction of a tank and tank bund across Arimakula Kona Vanka near Kapukandiga village of S.R.Puram mandal. For the aforesaid lands, an award was passed under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and compensation amount was also paid. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioners that as there is no approach road to their remaining land in Sy.Nos.59 and 60, admeasuring Ac.9.71 cents, they seek directions for acquisition of the said land also. It is also stated that after construction of the tank, the remaining land of petitioners is also getting submerged under the tank and there is also no ingress and egress to the left-over land of petitioners in the aforesaid survey numbers. On the aforesaid ground, they seek directions for acquisition of the remaining portion of their land. Counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent- Mandal Revenue Officer. In the counter affidavit, while denying the various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that on Eastern, Southern and Northern sides of the petitioners’ land, there exists a reserve forest. It is stated by the Mandal Revenue Officer that he has also made an inspection to the land in question and found that there is a cart track through the reserve forest on the Southern side and a pathway on the Northern side to reach the petitioners’ land. It is further stated that the agricultural produce from the patta lands is being transported through the aforesaid cart track. It is stated that there is no specific alignment and requisition from the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, for acquisition of the remaining patta land of petitioners, as such, there is no need to acquire the remaining land. Counter further specifically denies the allegation of petitioners that their remaining land is also under submergence. It is stated that the remaining patta land of petitioners is on the Eastern side of the tank, which is upland, and hence, there is no chance of submergence. After acquisition of a portion of land, if the remaining portion is unfit for use, the petitioners can claim severage charges, but on the ground that there is no approach road, they cannot seek for any directions for acquisition of the remaining land, more so, in the absence of any requisition from the Irrigation Department. From the counter affidavit, it is also clear that there is a cart track through the reserve forest, which is being used for transportation of agricultural produce by the farmers, apart from a pathway on the Northern side of the forest. In view of the said cart track to reach the land of petitioners, it cannot be said that there is no access to the remaining land, so as to grant the directions as prayed for. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 22nd October 2010 ajr