THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.759 of 2012
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated
05.12.2007 passed in W.P.No.36398 of 1998 by the learned
Single Judge.
The facts of the case reveal that the respondents/writ
petitioners, who are claiming themselves to be the owners of premises bearing No.5-9-25 in T.S.No.1, Ward No.53, Block-B of Shapurwadi, commonly known as Adarshnagar, Hyderabad, came up before this Court stating that the Government of Andhra Pradesh acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act") for public purposes and an award was passed on 30.05.1989. The matter was referred to civil Court under Section 30 of the Act for resolving apportionment/entitlement disputes. It has been further stated that the award was passed only to the extent of 3063 square meters and in respect of the balance area of 8812.78 square meters the award was not passed. The first writ petition i.e., W.P.No.6472 of 1992 was allowed by this Court on 15.09.1993 and the Land Acquisition Officer was directed to pass an award in the matter. Finally, an award was passed on 15.12.1993 awarding a sum of Rs.49 lakhs and again the matter was referred under Section 30 of the 2 Act. The petitioners before the learned Single Judge claimed a sum of Rs.4,000/- per square meter before the Land Acquisition Officer and as the amount was not granted, an application was preferred on 03.02.1994 seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act. However, as nothing was done, the subsequent writ petition was filed i.e., W.P.No.36398 of 1998.
The learned Single Judge keeping in view the earlier judgment delivered in the case of District Collector, Kakinda vs. P. Nagabhushana Rao1 has directed respondent No.1/Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (General) therein, to refer the matter to civil Court having jurisdiction in the matter.
The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, the beneficiary, has filed the present writ appeal.
In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Single Judge has not decided the issue of enhancement and compensation or the issue relating to apportionment. He has simply directed the Land Acquisition Officer to forward the application submitted by the petitioners to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge at the behest of BSNL, which is the ultimate beneficiary of the land in question.
1 2003 (6) ALD 48 (FB) 3 Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ______________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 29.11.2021 ES