The Special Deputy Collector, vs K.Venkata Sivudu
2024 Latest Caselaw 8917 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

The Special Deputy Collector, vs K.Venkata Sivudu on 26 September, 2024

Author: Ninala Jayasurya

Bench: Ninala Jayasurya

APHC010384122012
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI                       [3495]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

        THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
              TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                        PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT Nos.155,, 160, 161, 183, 191, 206,
              234, 237, 259, 269 and 274 of 2012

Between:
   1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR,, LA & REH., SRISAILAM
      PROJECT, KURNOOL DISTRICT
                                                  ...APPELLANT
                                  AND
   1. K BALA SNAJANNA, S/o. Pedda Pullanna Agril., R/o. Alaganur
      Village Midthur mandal, Kurnool District
                                               ...RESPONDENT

appeal against the order and decree passed in OP.No.102 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandikotkur dt. 24/10/2011

IA NO: 1 OF 2012(LAASMP 2012(LAASM 475 OF 2012 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 27 days in representing the above appeal

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. GP FOR APPEALS

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY

LAAS_155_2012 Batch

The Court made the following COMMON JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the common order dated 24.10.2011 fixing the market value of the lands of the claimants in L.A.O.P.Nos.102, 90, 85, 97, 108, 116, 94, 80, 107, 101 and 114 of 2007, these Appeal Nos.155, 160, 161, 183, 191, 206, 234, 237, 259, 269 and 274 of 2012 respectively came up for consideration and the same are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. Heard Mr.T.S.Rayalu, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellant/State and Mr.K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent/claimants.

3. For the purpose of widening of SRBC Channel, the lands of the respondents/claimants situated in different survey numbers of Alaganur Village were acquired by following the procedure contemplated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Award No.4 of 2007 dated 30.6.2007 was passed. During the Award enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer classified the lands into four categories and fixed compensation at the rate of Rs.1,26,000/-, Rs.1,01,000/-, Rs.75,000/- and Rs.50,000/- per acre for Category Nos.I, II, III and IV respectively. The respondents/claimants received the compensation under protest and the matter was carried to the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Reference Court fixed the compensation at Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. The State aggrieved by the enhancement of compensation from Rs.75,000/- to Rs.1,60,000/- per acre in respect of Category No.III lands filed the present appeals.

4. The learned Government Pleader, inter alia contends that the enhancement of compensation to Rs.1,60,000/- per acre is without any valid basis and the learned Reference Court committed a serious error in fixing the market value at Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. It is his contention that

LAAS_155_2012 Batch

when the Reference Court is of the view that as per the discrete enquiries of the Land Acquisition Officer, market value of the lands was ranging from Rs.75,000/- to Rs.90,000/- per acre, it ought to have fixed the market value utmost at Rs.90,000/-, however, went wrong in enhancing the same with reference to common order in LAAS Nos.759 and 853 of 2007 (Ex.A.6). He also contends that even otherwise when the Hon'ble High Court has fixed the compensation in the said order at Rs.1,00,000/- per acre by taking into account escalation, further enhancement as adopted by the Reference Court in respect of the subject matter lands amounts to "enhancement on enhancement" and the same is not permissible. Making the said submissions, the learned Government Pleader seeks to allow all the appeals.

5. On the other hand, Mr.K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents, while drawing the attention of this Court to the order dated LAAS Nos.759 of 2007, submits that the enhancement of compensation made by the Reference Court is just, valid and reasonable. He submits that Ex.A.6 order pertains to Award dated 28.7.2001 wherein the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of the lands situated in the same Village fixed the market value at Rs.36,000/- per acre and on a reference sought by the claimants, it was enhanced to Rs.52,000/- per acre. He submits that feeling aggrieved by the same, the matter was carried to the Hon'ble High Court and adding escalation at 10% as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Om Prakash (D) by L.Rs v. Union of India1, the market value was enhanced from Rs.52,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. He also submits that in so far as the lands in question are concerned, the Award was passed in the year 2007 and therefore, the contention of the learned Government Pleader to fix the market value at the most at Rs.90,000/- per acre, which was enhanced by the Hon'ble

(2004) 10 SCC 627

LAAS_155_2012 Batch

High Court in respect of the Award of the year 2001, is not tenable and cannot be accepted. He submits that in the present case, the Reference Court has also taken into consideration the time gap between the earlier Award passed in the year 2001 and the Award in respect of the subject matter lands passed in the year 2007 and therefore, the fixation of the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per acre adding 10% escalation by taking into consideration the time gap, under any circumstances, be viewed as excessive or unreasonable. Making the said submissions, the learned counsel seeks for dismissal of the appeals.

6. This Court has considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel on both sides. As seen from the material on record, it would appear that earlier Award dated 28.7.2001 is in respect of the lands, which are situated in Alaganur Village and while examining the Award as also the orders passed by the Reference Court, a Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by adding 10% escalation fixed the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. It is not the case of the State that the said fixation was challenged. It appears that the said orders have become final and no material is placed before this Court contrary to the same. Be that as it may. Though the learned counsel for the appellant contended that the enhancement should have been confined to Rs.90,000/- per acre, in the light of the fixation of the market value of the lands, which were acquired in the year 2001, this Court see nothing wrong in fixing the compensation by taking the orders passed in respect of the lands, which are situated in the very same Village. In G.M., O.N.G.C. Ltd., v. Sendhabhai Vastram Patel 2 the Hon'ble Supreme Court inter alia held that instances of sale of similar land situated in the same Village or neighbouring Villages can be taken for determination of the market value.

(2005) 6 SCC 454

LAAS_155_2012 Batch

7. Further the contention that the escalation at 10% by the Reference Court in respect of the subject matter lands amounts to "enhancement on enhancement" cannot be appreciated. In fact, the Reference Court has taken the time gap between the Award passed in the year 2001 and the Award passed in the year 2007 in respect of the lands in question.

8. Considering the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the view that the enhancement of compensation by the Reference Court was based on the material on record, supported by cogent reasons and warrants no interference by this Court.

9. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, these appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. All pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J

______________________ T MALLIKARJUNA RAO,J September 26, 2024 vasu