THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.817 of 2002 Dated:06.02.2008 Between: Smt.Yerramilli Seethadevi. …Petitioner and District Collector, East Godavari District, Rajahmundry, and another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.817 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner is statedly owner of land admeasuring Acs.4.32 cents in Survey Nos.553/1B-2, 554/1B, and 555/1B situated at Rajahmundry (Rural). The Government proposed to acquire the land. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity), was issued on 10.09.1985 after following the procedure and an Award was passed being Award No.2 of 1988, dated 13.04.1988. A sum of Rs.6,31,584/- was awarded. The petitioner then submitted an application to the second respondent requesting to refer the matter to a civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. It is alleged that respondents acknowledged the same and by a communication bearing Reference No.A-2829/85 dated 22.05.1989 referred the matter to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Rajamundry. The said communication was also marked to the petitioner. The petitioner, however, did not receive any notices. Therefore, she filed an application styled as caveat petition SR.No.660 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajamundry. In the said caveat she prayed the Court to register the reference made by the second respondent. The said application was returned on 20.02.2001 with an endorsement, “The fact of return of LAOP cannot now be traced, as the connected registers have already been destroyed as per Rules”. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is filed. The Writ Petition was admitted on 30.12.2002. Though the Government Pleader for Land Acquisition filed appearance, counter affidavit is not filed. This Court has heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, who has placed before this Court the original of the returned application caveat petition SR.No.660 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajamundry. The attention of this Court is also invited to the communication dated 22.05.1989 of the second respondent. The same reads as below. Ref:A.2829/85 dt.22.05.1989 Sub Collector’s Office, Rajahmundry. From To Sri M.A.Somanadha Sastry, B.A., The Subordinate Judge, Revenue Divl.Officer, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Sri, Sub: LAND ACQUISITION – Rajahmundry Mandal and Rural – S.Nos.553/1B etc. measuring Ac.4.32 etc. for construction of oil depot by B.P.O.Ltd. Court ref.u/s.18 of L.A.Act – Sent – reg. Ref: 1. This office Award No.2/88 dt.13.4.88. 2. Representation dt.2-7-88 of Sri Y.Seethadevi. * * * An extent of Ac.4.32 was acquired under Award No.2/88 dt.13.4.88 covered by S.Nos.353/1B, 554/1B & 555/1B for construction of Oil Depot by B.P.C.Ltd, Madras. Smt.Y.Seetadevi land owner has taken the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and put in a petition to refer the matter to the competent civil Court u/s.18 of the L.A.Act for fixation on adequate and proper compensation as the Land Acquisition Officer fixed Law value. The awardee has taken the compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value @ Rs.1,00,000/- p.a. As per the request of the awardee I send herewith the Court refer in triplionats u/s.18 of the Land Acquisition Act along with 3 copies of award and the representation of the awardee in original. I request that the ref. may be taken on file design O.P.No. and furnish the O.P.No. assigned to the ref. Yours faithfully, Sd/- Encl.As above Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajahmundry. Copy to Smt.Yerramilli Seethadevi, W/o.Jagatpathi, R-117, Pragathi Vihar, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003. Copy to the Govt.Pleader, Rajahmundry. A perusal of the above communication would show that the second respondent referred the Award to the civil Court on a representation dated 02.07.1998 made by the petitioner. Now that it is conclusively shown that the said OP was registered, and return of the same was not taken by Land Acquisition Officer, as a result of which, records were destroyed, the respondents should make a reference now. For the fault of the second respondent or his Lawyer in the civil Court citizen’s right to seek reference cannot be defeated. Therefore, for the above brief reasons the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to send a reference to the civil Court of competent jurisdiction under Section 18 of the Act duly considering his reference No.A.2829/85 dated 22.05.1989, which is extracted hereinabove. This exercise shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 06.02.2008 Note: Issue C.C in one week. B/o. vs