Telangana High Court
The Land Acquisition Officer vs Vempati Krishnaiah on 23 August, 2024
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
LAAS.No.320 of 2018
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty) Heard learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant. None appears for respondent/claimant.
2. This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short 'the Act'), is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer), Khammam, aggrieved by the order and decree dated 29.12.2016 passed in L.A.O.P.No.81 of 2003 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Khammam (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court').
3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that land admeasuring Acs.25.13 ¾ guntas situated in Sy.Nos.106, 107, 108, 115, 116, 120, 137, 141, 162, 163, 214, 215, 217, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 273, 274, 275, 178, 179, 325, 326, 327, 332, 214, 215 and 142 of Edulapuram, Khammam Rural Mandal, Khammam District, which includes the land belonging to the respondent/claimant to an extent of Ac.0.04 guntas situated in Sy.Nos.326/2C and 327/2AA of 2 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018 Edulapuram, Khammam Rural Mandal, Khammam District, were acquired for the purpose of widening and strengthening of Warangal-Khammam-Thallada road; that possession of the subject land was taken on 20.11.2000; and that the Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary award enquiry, passed Award No.13/2002, dated 22.05.2002, granting compensation of Rs.11,906/- to the respondent/claimant for the acquired land.
4. The respondent/claimant received the compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Officer under protest and sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and the same was numbered as L.A.O.P.No.81 of 2003 on the file of the Reference Court.
5. Before the Reference Court, on behalf of the respondent/claimant, the claimant got himself examined as P.W-1 and Exs.A-1 to A-6 were marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, R.W-1 was examined and Ex.B-1-Award was marked.
6. The Reference Court by the impugned order enhanced the market value of the acquired land to Rs.275/- per square yard, apart from granting other benefits under the Act to the respondent/claimant.
3 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018
7. Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Reference Court, the present appeal is filed.
8. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals contended that the Reference Court erred in relying upon the exhibits marked on behalf of the respondent/claimant and thereby, erred in enhancing the compensation exorbitantly, that too, on yardage basis, instead of on acreage basis and therefore, he seeks to set aside the impugned order of the Reference Court.
9. In the instant case, before the Reference Court, the respondent/claimant, in support of his claim for enhancement of compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Officer, has got marked as many as six exhibits, i.e., Exs.A-2 and A-3-certified copies of order and decree passed in LAOP.No.15 of 2003, respectively, Ex.A-5-photostat copy of common judgment passed in LAAS.Nos.186 and 241 of 2011 and Ex.A-6-photostat copy of order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP.No. /2014, CC.No.525/2014.
10. It is undisputed that the subject lands situated in Sy.Nos.326/2C and 327/2AA belonging to the respondent/claimant 4 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018 were acquired along with other lands as stated supra, for the purpose of widening and strengthening of Warangal-Khammam- Thallada road and the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.13/2002 for the acquired lands.
11. The very purpose of acquisition of the subject lands i.e., for the widening and strengthening of Warangal-Khammam-Thalla road itself shows that the acquired lands are abutting the road. P.W-1 deposed that the acquired lands are situated at a distance of 2 kms from RTC bus stand, railway station, DRDA Office and many houses were also constructed near the acquired lands.
12. R.W-1-Land Acquisition Officer in his evidence admitted that hundreds of transactions took place in and around the acquired lands during the years 1990 to 2000 on square yard basis. He further admitted that 325 sale transactions took place in respect of Sy.Nos.70, 81, 113 and 126 of Edulapuram, out of which 274 sale transactions took place on yardage basis. In background of such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the Land Acquisition Officer has erred in fixing the market value of the acquired lands on acreage basis, which was rightly interfered with by the 5 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018 Reference Court, on reference, and the market value of the acquired lands was fixed on yardage basis.
13. It is pertinent to note that Ex.A-2 is the order passed in LAOP.No.15 of 2003, with respect to the subject lands therein situated in Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam Urban Mandal, which were acquired for the purpose of widening and strengthening of Warangal-Khammam-Thallada road and the Reference Court enhanced market value of the acquired lands to Rs.275/- per square yard. The order of the Reference Court was challenged before the High Court by the Land Acquisition Officer, vide LAAS.Nos.186 of 2010 and 241 of 2011, but the said cases stood dismissed, vide common judgment, dated 09.07.2012. The matter was carried in appeal to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and under Ex.A-6, the said case was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the order of the Reference Court. Thus, the matter has attained finality.
14. The purpose of acquisition of the subject acquired lands are same as that of the subject lands covered under the aforesaid common judgment dated 09.07.2012 passed in LAAS.Nos.186 of 2010 and 241 of 2011, which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme 6 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018 Court in SLP(C).No.3315 of 2014, vide judgment dated 31.01.2014.
15. However, in the case on hand, the acquired lands are situated in Edulapuram Village, while the lands covered under the aforesaid common judgment, dated 09.07.2012, passed in LAAS.Nos.186 of 2010 and 241 of 2011, are situated at Khanapuram Haveli.
16. Here, it is relevant to note the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Bal Ram and another 1, wherein it is held that if the purpose of acquisition and the nature of lands are similar, though they are lying in different villages, there should not be any discrimination in awarding compensation, unless there are strong reasons.
17. In the light of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bal Ram's case (cited supra), this Court is of the considered opinion that the aforesaid common judgment dated 09.07.2012 passed in LAAS.Nos.186 of 2010 and 241 of 2011 is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. 1 2010(5) SCC 747 7 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS.No.320 of 2018
18. Therefore, in view of the common judgment dated 09.07.2012 passed by this Court in LAAS.Nos.186 of 2010 and 241 of 2011, this Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
19. Accordingly, this Appeal is dismissed.
20. As a sequel, interim order dated 15.04.2021 granting stay shall stand vacated. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
_______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J ___________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dated:23.08.2024 dr