Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kandaleru Jalasayam Punaravasa Kendra ... vs The State Of Ap on 27 August, 2024
Author: R.Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010131092024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3488]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT APPEAL NO: 457/2024
Between:
Kandaleru Jalasayam Punaravasa Kendra Committee ...APPELLANT
AND
The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. CHETLURU SREENIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
2. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
The members of the appellant herein had lost their lands on account of
their land being acquired for foreshore submersion of Kandaleru Reservoir
under the Telugu Ganga Project. It may also be noted that the land acquisition
process under which the members of the appellant had lost their lands
included acquisition of lands of other persons also.
2. Some of the other affected persons, being dissatisfied with the amount
of compensation awarded to them, had sought reference, under Section 18 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to the District Court for enhancement of the
compensation. In one such reference, the Learned V Additional District Judge,
Nellore, in L.A.O.P.No.01 of 2011, by an award, dated 22.09.2014, enhanced
compensation by 150% of the compensation awarded by the land Acquisition
Officer.
3. Another set of persons who have lost their properties, under the same
acquisition process, had sought enhancement of compensation and the same
was pending as L.A.O.P.No.8 of 2015. These persons moved the Learned VII
Additional District Judge, Gudur, before whom this O.P. was pending, for
enhancement, in alignment with the enhancement granted in L.A.O.P.No.1 of
2011. The District Judge, after noticing the fact that the state had filed an
Appeal in L.A.S.S.No.65 of 2015 before this Court which, by an order dated
30.04.2015, had directed the Government to deposit 50% of the enhanced
compensation together with statutory benefits within a period of three (3)
months from the date of receipt of the order, as a condition for grant of stay,
had also directed similar payment to the petitioners in L.A.O.P.No.08 of 2015.
4. The appellant herein, who had not sought any reference, under Section
18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, had moved the Deputy Collector, Land
Acquisition, who is arrayed as respondent No.4 herein, for payment of
additional compensation. As his request was denied, the appellant has
approached this Court by way of W.P.No.28346 of 2017, contending that
Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, conferred the right on him for
such payment. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by an order dated
08.01.2024, had rejected the said contention, on the ground that the benefit of
Section 28-A would be available only when there is an award by the reference
Court and as there was no final award in the present case, no benefit would
be given to the petitioner. On that ground, the Writ Petition was dismissed.
5. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has approached this Court,
by way of the present Writ Appeal.
6. Heard Sri Ch.Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition.
7. Section 28-A of the Act states that persons who had not sought for
reference under Section 18 of the Act, for enhancement of compensation,
would also be entitled for additional compensation, if any other person,
affected by the same land acquisition has been granted compensation in
reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
8. The requirement, in short, of this provision is that there should be an
award of enhancement of compensation granted by the land Acquisition
Officer. In the present case, there is such an award, being the award dated
22.09.2014 given by the V Additional District Judge, Nellore, in L.A.O.P.No.01
of 2011. However, by virtue of the order of stay granted by this Court, in
L.A.A.S.No.65 of 2015, only an enhanced compensation of 50% was directed
to be deposited and paid out to the affected persons.
9. In these circumstances, keeping in view, the fact that the land
acquisition act, 1894 is itself an expropriatory act and that grant of
compensation to the affected parties should be treated liberally, it would be
appropriate to allow this Writ Appeal with a direction to the 4th respondent to
deposit 50% of the enhanced amount, in line with the direction given by the VII
Additional District Judge, Gudur, in his order dated 24.04.2017 in
L.A.O.P.No.08 of 2015 in I.A.No.405 of 2016. The said payment would include
payment of compensation with all statutory benefits. The same shall be done
within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of this order.
10. Needless to say, any payment made under this order shall be subject
to the re-determination of compensation that would be carried out by the
Deputy Collector under Section 28-A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
11. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to
costs.
As a sequel, pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
______________
HARINATH.N, J
MH
27.08.2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT APPEAL NO:457/2024
MH
27.08.2024
