Secretary, Revenue Dept., ... vs Vanka Lakshmi, Khammam District ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3780 Tel

         THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                      AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


                  WRIT APPEAL No.1994 of 2013

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)


       Ms. P.Bhavana Rao, learned Government Pleader for

Land Acquisition for the appellants.

       Mr. R.R.Kalyan, learned counsel for respondents No.1

to 14.


2.     This intra court appeal has been filed against the

order dated 27.01.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge

by which the writ petition preferred by respondents No.1 to

14, namely W.P.No.30463 of 2011, has been allowed.


3.       Facts

giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated

are that respondents No.1 to 14 filed the writ petition,

namely W.P.No.30463 of 2011, in which a grievance was

made that even though they were assignees of the land in

question, the land allotted to them was utilised for the

benefit of the Andhra Pradesh Generation Corporation

Limited. However, ex gratia amount to which they were

entitled, was not paid. The said writ petition was allowed

by the learned Single Judge by order dated 27.01.2012

inter alia on the ground that they were assignees of the

land in question and the assignment granted in their

favour was not cancelled. Therefore, they were entitled to

the ex gratia payment.

4. In the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has

been filed.

5. Learned Government Pleader for the appellants

submitted that the learned Single Judge ought to have

appreciated that respondents No.1 to 14 were not in

possession of the land in question and therefore, alternate

lands were allotted to them at some other location.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents

No.1 to 14 has submitted that no case for grant of

interference has been made out.

7. We have considered the rival submissions made on

both sides and have perused the record.

8. Admittedly, the land in question was assigned in

favour of respondents No.1 to 14 in the year 1991. No

proceeding was initiated for resumption of the land, which

was assigned to them. The compensation was paid by the

appellants to the persons who were allegedly in occupation

of the land in question. Learned Single Judge, therefore,

rightly found that respondents No.1 to 14 were the

assignees in respect of the land in question and they have

been deprived of their right to claim the ex gratia payment.

The learned Single Judge, therefore, has allowed the writ

petition filed by respondents No.1 to 14. The order passed

by the learned Single Judge neither suffers from any

jurisdictional infirmity nor any error apparent on the face

of the record.

9. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any

merit in this appeal. The same is hereby dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ

______________________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J 09.11.2023 vs