Telangana High Court
Jageeri Parshaiah, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 28 March, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.12309 of 2009
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under the Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following relief:
" ...to issue a Writ in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ or Writs Order or Direction declaring the action of Respondent in not considering the applicatin dt 912006 made by petitioner seeking reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act as illegal and arbitrary by setting aside the Memo dt 342007 in Memo No E/414/2005 on the file of the Respondent and to consequently direct the Respondent to refer the application dt 912006 made by petitioner to competent civil court under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act for determining proper compensation in respect of the acquired lands of petitioner Award costs..."
2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and perused the material on record.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.02 guntas in Sy.No.174 situated at Arepalli Village, Karimnagar Madal and District. The respondent herein has ::2::
SK, J W.P.No.12309 of 2009 acquired the land of the petitioner by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act'), subsequently, passed Award dated 21.11.2005 for the purpose of laying new B.G.Railway Line from Karimnagar to Nizamabad. In view of the compensation determined and fixed by the respondent herein in Award dated 21.11.2005 as meager, the petitioner made an application dated 09.01.2006 to the respondent herein. On the ground of expiry of stipulated time period, the respondent herein rejected the application of the petitioner in Memo No.E/414/2005 on 03.04.2007. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent, the petitioner filed the present writ petition and requested to allow the writ petition by setting aside the Memo No.E/414/2005 dated 03.04.2007.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions relied upon the Judgment passed by the High ::3::
SK, J W.P.No.12309 of 2009 Court of Madras in Karunakaran and Ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer & Sub-Collector 1.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for the respondent submits that notices were issued under Section 9(3) & 10 of the Act to the interested persons on 11.12.2002 and conducted enquiry by the then Land Acquisition Officer and an Award was passed on 21.11.2005 vide Award No.7/2004. On that date of Award, the petitioner received the amount under protest, but, not filed any application within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of the Award. The date of the Award was 21.11.2005 and the petitioner has to file application on or before 01.01.2006. But, the petitioner has filed application under Section 18 of the Act on 10.01.2006 and the same was time barred, then the respondents rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground of delay. In view of the above facts, there is no valid ground to allow the writ petition and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 1
MANU/TN/7696/2021 ::4::
SK, J W.P.No.12309 of 2009
6. After hearing both sides and perusing the entire material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the respondents acquired the land of the petitioner and for the same an Award was passed on 21.11.2005 in Award No.7/2004. The petitioner received the Award amount under protest as per the averments made by the respondents in their counter at Para No.3. The present impugned orders are passed on the ground that the petitioner has made application after six (06) weeks i.e., on 10.01.2006.
7. In fact, the petitioner has received the Award amount under protest as per counter filed by the respondents. The contentions of the petitioner is that it is settled law that once an Awardee received the compensation under protest, the duty of the Land Acquisition Officer is to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18(2) of the Act without any formal application.
8. The Judgment relied by the learned Counsel for the petitioner squarely apply to the instance case and the relevant ::5::
SK, J W.P.No.12309 of 2009 portion of the Judgment passed by the High Court of Madras in Karunakaran and Ors. Vs. Land Acquisition Officer & Sub-Collector (supra) at Para No.6 is as follows:
"6. Though the award was passed on 11.08.2009, the petitioners received 80% of the compensation amount under protest on 08.09.2008 and the balance 20% of the award amount was also received by them under protest on 13.01.2011. Though the petitioners made request on 03.03.2011 for reference under Section 18 of the Act, from the above judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is clear that even without a formal application, if the land owner expresses his protest or dis-
satisfaction to the award of compensation, the authority is under an obligation to refer the matter to the Court under Section 18(2) of the Act. Under these circumstances, it cannot be contented that, without a formal application, reference cannot be made to the Civil Court for enhancement of the compensation.
9. In the instant case, admittedly the petitioner has received the amount under protest. The duty upon the Land Acquisition Officer is to refer the matter to Civil Court under Section 18(2) for enhancement of compensation. Now, the respondents cannot deny the rights of the petitioner on the ::6::
SK, J W.P.No.12309 of 2009 ground of delay of nine (09) days. In number cases, this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has passed orders in liberal approach for technicalities. Therefore, the respondents have to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for enhancement of the compensation in respect of the acquired land of the petitioner.
10. In view of the same, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the Memo No.E/414/2005 dated 03.04.2007 on the file of the respondent, consequently, directing the respondent to refer the application dated 09.01.2006 made by the petitioner to the Competent Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. There shall be no order as to costs.
11. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date: 28.03.2024 spk