THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.17133 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 to the structures of the petitioners 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 in Survey No.36 and Survey No.374 of 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 structures in the Gramakantam (Village sites)
since from their ancestors. 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. 44 structures in Survey No.36 and 8 structures in
survey No.374 of their village not notified in draft notification
and draft declaration. It is the further case of the petitioners 2
that the Revenue Divisional Officer in his proceedings vide
RC.B(L.A)1295/2011, dated 22.08.2015 called for estimates
from Deputy Executive Engineer, A.P. Housing Corporation for
their houses, which are not notified in Draft Notification under
Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and the Executive
Engineer estimated an amount of Rs.99,64,875/- for their
structures and paid the said amount as exgratia on 22.08.2015
to them 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. On
such, they approached the respondent authorities for
compensation in terms of the Land Acquisition Act but they did
not take any steps. Questioning the action of the respondent
authorities in not issuing the notification under Section 11 of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act and thereby
paying exgratia as estimated by the Executive Engineer, 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. The entire land acquisition 3
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.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to
what has been stated in the affidavit contended that having paid
exgratia to the petitioners, no compensation has been paid so far
and award has not been passed as such the petitioners are
entitled for compensation under Act 30 of 2013. 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 new Act came
into force. Though the award is not passed, the petitioners are
1 (2020) 8 SCC 129 4
not entitled for compensation under new Act. Even otherwise,
the petitioners have not approached the authorities before filing
the writ petition and as such, 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 has 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
after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners 5
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 6
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.17133 OF 2019
Dated : 01.12.2022
SPP
