THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.17412 OF 2019
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:
"...to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying compensation in terms of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 30 of 2013 as illegal and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation for their structures situated at Velugonu Village, H/o.Nellepalli of Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District in terms of Act 30 of 2013 ..."
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are residents of the
Velugonu village, H/o.Nellepalli Papur Mandal, SPSR Nellore
District and having house sites and structures in the
Gramakantam (Village sites). For the formation of New Braud
Guaege Line from Obulavaripalle to Krishnapatnam Port, the
respondents acquired structures and lands in their village in the
year 2015. There were 16 ST families in the village and out of
them 8 persons were paid compensation by the respondents.
They made representations to the 3rd respondent on 08.09.2015
stating that their houses are outside the boundary line and very 2
adjacent to boundary line, the influence of track and passing of
trains impact on their families as the lands are adjacent to the
Track and requested for payment of compensation. The
respondents ought to have paid compensation to them but not
paid any compensation to the petitioners 1 to 8 and also to the
petitioners 9 to 16, who are having their structures within the
boundary line. The respondents, without giving notification under
Section 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act i.e., Act
30 of 2013, have taken their lands. The 4th respondent
submitted a report in Rc.B173/2015, dated 29.09.2015 to the 3 rd
respondent stating the details of the structures and ground
realities relating to all the 16 structures. Since then no action
was taken for payment of compensation to their structures.
Questioning the action of the respondent authorities in not
paying compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, the present writ petition is filed.
3. The 4th respondent filed counter denying the allegations
inter alia contending that the land acquisition proceedings have
been initiated during the year 2011 itself following the procedure
under A.P. Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is further stated in the 3
counter that the structure value received in the year 2015 and
therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional
Officer, Nellore paid the structure value to the petitioners on
20.02.2015 and there is no need to issue notification under
Section 11 of the Act 30 of 2013. It is further stated in the
counter that the 4th respondent, the then Tahsildar, Rapur
Mandal, submitted a report to the 3rd respondent/Land
Acquisition Officer duly verifying the ground status, reporting
that the houses and lands of the petitioners 1, 9, 10 to 13, 15
and 16 herein come under alignment and in respect of other
petitioners they do not come under alignment and the Land
Acquisition Officer addressed letter to the authorities who are
competent to fix the structure value and Land Acquisition Officer
determined the market value of the structures of the petitioners
and paid amount to the petitioners. The entire land acquisition
proceedings completed prior to Act, 30 of 2013 coming into force
as such the compensation cannot be paid under the new Act, as
such there is no necessity for issuing notification under Section
11 of the Act 30 of 2013 and prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Heard Sri D.Kodandarami Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. 4
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to
what has been stated in the affidavit contended that the
structures of the petitioners 1 to 8 are adjacent to the track and
the structures of petitioners 9 to 16 are within the boundary line
but no compensation has been paid so far and no award has
been passed as such the petitioners are entitled for
compensation under Act 30 of 2013. Inspite of report submitted
by the 4th respondent vide Rc.B.173/2015, dated 29.09.2015, no
steps were taken for payment of compensation to the
petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that according to
settled principles of law and in view of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Indore Development Authority vs.
Manoharlal and others1, the new Act will apply and prayed to
consider the petitioners' case and to allow the writ petition.
6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader
contended that initially the land acquisition proceedings were
initiated way back in the year, 2011 much prior to coming into
force of the new Act. The land belongs to the petitioners 1, 9 to
16 in an extent of Ac.0.72 cents was acquired and to that effect
compensation was paid including structures also and as the land
belongs to the petitioners 2 to 8 are outside track, they were not
1 (2020) 8 SCC 129 5
acquired, as such, question of payment of compensation does
not arise. Even otherwise, the petitioners have not approached
the authorities before filing the writ petition for their entitlement
of compensation and hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
7. The issue involved in the present case is that non-payment
of compensation to the petitioners. Though the land acquisition
proceedings commenced before coming into force of the new
Act, no award has been passed and hence, the compensation has
to be paid under the provisions of Section 24(1)(A) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 2013 or under old Act is to be determined.
However, as rightly contended by the learned Assistant
Government Pleader that the petitioners, instead of approaching
the authorities, have filed the present writ petition, this Court is
inclined to dispose of the writ petition without going into merits
of the case, with the following directions:-
i) The petitioners are directed to make a representation to
the District Collector/2nd respondent by raising all the issues
along with all the relevant documents in support of their claim
within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order;
ii) On receipt of such representation, the 2nd
respondent/District Collector is directed to dispose of the same 6
after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners
and pass appropriate and reasoned order as per law by taking the
material placed before the authorities into consideration, within a
period of eight (8) weeks thereafter.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be
no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any,
shall stand closed.
________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Dated : 01.12.2022
SPP 7
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.17412 OF 2019
Dated : 01.12.2022 8
SPP
