Telangana High Court
Kamaleshwar Reddy vs The Land Acquisition Officer, on 6 November, 2024
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
L.A.A.S.Nos. 215, 218, 222 and 251 of 2012
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) All these appeals arose out of the common order, dated 24-02-2004 passed in LAOP Nos.67, 68, 69 and 70 of 2002 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Wanaparthy, and they are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Heard Sri V. Manohar, learned counsel for the appellants and Smt. P. Babita, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Appeals, appearing for the respondent-Land Acquisition Officer.
3. It has been contended by the appellants/claimants that the appellants' lands were acquired for excavation and forming embankment for Distributory No.9 which is tail and channel in pursuance of Notification, dated 24-04-1998 and the Land Acquisition Officer has passed an award on 21-05-1999 fixing compensation for the land @ Rs.15,000/- per acre and the appellants have sought for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Land Acquisition Officer has referred the matter to the Reference 2 AKS,J & LNA,J L.A.A.S.No.215 of 2012 & batch Court for enhancement of compensation and the said reference was numbered as LAOP No.67 of 2002, however, the reference Court has dismissed the said LAOP vide orders, dated 24-02-2004 without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the appellants.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants had contended that earlier the lands in the same village were acquired for the purpose of balancing reservoir under Priyadarshini Jurala Project in pursuance of Notification, dated 17-08-1990 and this Court has fixed the compensation in that appeal A.S.No.1314 of 2000 in O.P.No.67 of 1996 by enhancing the compensation to Rs.26,000/- per acre vide orders, dated 07-03-2003.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants had further contended that the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in A.S.No.1314 of 2000 and batch, dated 07-03-2003 was also filed before the Reference Court but the Reference Court has not considered the said judgment on the ground that the appellants could not prove that the lands in question in A.S.No.1314 of 2000 were situated in close proximity to the subject lands. Learned counsel for the appellants had further contended that in that case, the lands were acquired in pursuance of Notification, dated 17-08-1990, and after nearly eight years, the subject lands of the 3 AKS,J & LNA,J L.A.A.S.No.215 of 2012 & batch appellants were acquired in pursuance of Notification, dated 24-04-1998. So the Reference Court ought to have enhanced the compensation at least to Rs.26000/- per acre as awarded by this Court in the above said appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants had contended that the lands of the appellants as well as the lands in question in A.S.No.1314 of 2000, dated 07-03-2003 are pertaining to the very same village and the purpose of acquiring the lands in both the cases is for the same project. May be the lands in A.S.No.1314 of 200 must have been acquired for balancing reservoir. In the instant case, the appellants' lands were acquired for excavation of distributary canal of the very same project. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the appeal by enhancing the compensation from Rs.15000/- per acre to Rs.26,000/- per acre by following the orders of a Division Bench of this Court in L.A.A.S.No.1314 of 2000 and batch, dated 07-03-2003.
7. Learned Government Pleader for the respondent-LAO had contended that the Reference Court has rightly not taken into account the judgment in A.S.No.1314 of 2000, dated 07-03-2003 on the ground that the appellants failed to prove that the lands in question in A.S.No.1314 of 2000, dated 07-03-2003 are in close proximity to 4 AKS,J & LNA,J L.A.A.S.No.215 of 2012 & batch the subject lands acquired. Therefore, the Reference Court has not enhanced the compensation and rightly rejected the LAOP on 24-02- 2004. Therefore, there are no merits in the appeals and are liable to be dismissed.
8. This Court, having heard the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, is of the considered opinion that the lands in A.S.No.1314 of 2000 and batch, dated 07-03-2003 were acquired in pursuance to the Notification, dated 17-08-1990 and on reference, the Reference Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.26,000/- per acre which was confirmed by the High Court in A.S.No.1314 of 2000, dated 07-03-2003. In this case also, the Reference Court ought to have enhanced the compensation to Rs.26,000/- per acre for the lands which were acquired in pursuance of Notification, dated 24-04-1998 since there is time gap of eight years and the appellants are also seeking reasonable compensation of Rs.26,000/- per acre on par with the lands acquired in pursuance of Notification, dated 17-08-1990. Further the lands of the appellants as well as the lands in A.S.No.1314 of 2000, dated 07-03-2003 are situated in the same village and the lands in both the cases are acquired for the very same project. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the compensation can be enhanced to Rs.26,000/- per acre.
5 AKS,J & LNA,J L.A.A.S.No.215 of 2012 & batch
9. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Reference Court was not justified in dismissing all the O.P.No.67 of 2002 and batch vide common orders, dated 24-02-2004 and that orders of the Reference Court are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, they are set aside and the appellants are entitled for compensation of Rs.26,000/- per acre along with all statutory benefits. However, the appellants are not entitled for interest portion for the delayed period in preferring the appeals.
10. With these observations, all the Appeals are allowed. No costs.
11. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J _________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dt.06.11.2024 Kvr