Telangana High Court

The Land Acquisition Officer vs Smt. Rajubai, on 27 February, 2025

Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili

Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili

       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
                           AND
        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

                        L.A.A.S.No.682 of 2011

JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble Smt. Justice Tirumala Devi Eada)

This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act,

1894, (for short 'the Act') is preferred by the Land Acquisition

Officer, SRSP, Pochampad, aggrieved by the judgment and decree

dated 13.04.1999 passed in O.P.No.610 of 1991 by the learned

Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (hereinafter referred to as

'the reference Court').

2. For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to

as they were arrayed before the reference Court.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that the Executive Engineer,

I & CAD (PW) Department, Sriramsagar Project, Pochampad has

filed requisition for acquiring certain agricultural lands from

Vamcha Village, Navipet Mandal, Nizamabad Ditrict for

submergence under the Sriramsagar Project. An extent of

Ac.17-04 guntas of land has been acquired by the Land Acquisition

Officer. A draft notification under Section 4(1) and 6 of the Act was

published in AP Gazette on 24.01.1991 and 25.01.1991

respectively, and was published in English daily newspaper on AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

18.02.1991 and Telugu daily newspaper on 19.02.1991. The Land

Acquisition Officer has passed award granting a compensation of

Rs.8,000/- per acre, as market value for dry lands under

acquisition. Aggrieved by the said award, the claimants have made

an application for reference and the same was referred under

Section 18 of the Act to the reference Court.

4. The reference Court has framed the following issues for

consideration:

"1. Whether the compensation awarded by the L.A.O. is inadequate and unreasonable?

2. Whether the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation?

3. To what relief?"

5. To prove their case, the claimants got examined three

witnesses (RWs 1 to 3) and got marked Exs.B1 and B2. The Land

Acquisition Officer has not adduced any evidence.

6. Based on the evidence on record, the reference Court has

enhanced the compensation to Rs.17,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by

the said enhancement, the Land Acquisition Officer has preferred

the present appeal.

AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

7. Heard the submissions of learned Government Pleader for

the appellant and Sri T.Narsa Reddy, learned counsel for the

respondents.

8. Learned appellant counsel has submitted that the reference

Court ought not to have enhanced any compensation to the

claimants and that the claimants have placed wrong documents

before the reference Curt and the reference court has grossly erred

in relying upon Exs.B1 and B2. He further submitted that the

Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the compensation based on the

various sale instances gathered during the award enquiry and

therefore, the reference Court ought to have confirmed the same,

instead of enhancing the compensation, he thus, prayed to set

aside the award passed by the reference Court by allowing this

appeal.

9. The learned respondents counsel has argued that the

reference Court has properly examined the evidence on record and

has rightly granted the enhanced compensation, he therefore,

prayed this Court to confirm the award passed by the reference

Court by dismissing the appeal.

10. Based on the above rival contentions, this Court frames the

following points for determination:

AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

1. Whether the claimants are not entitled for enhancement of compensation?

2. Whether the judgment and decree of the reference Court need any interference?

3. To what relief?

11. POINT NO.1:

a) RW1 is a claimant and his evidence reveals that he is one of

the claimants in O.P.No.81 of 1989 which was filed pursuant to the

acquisition of land for the purpose of railway bridge and that he

was awarded Rs.17,000/- per acre. Ex.B1 filed by him is the

certified copy of the said award. That their acquired lands are

abutting the road and are prone for development and that the

lands fetch more than Rs.90,000/- per acre. He further deposed

that the lands at Binola village were also acquired for the same

purpose and they were awarded Rs.35,000/- per acre and that

their lands are more fertile than the lands of Binola village.

b) The evidence of RW2 reveals that he is the resident of Binola

and that their lands were acquired under submergence of SRSP

project and that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded

Rs.3,000/- per acre for dry lands and Rs.7,500/- per acre for wet

lands but the reference Court has awarded an enhanced amount of

Rs.17,000/- for dry lands and Rs.19,000/- for wet lands, over

which they have preferred an appeal and the High Court has AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

enhanced the compensation to Rs.18,000/- for dry lands and

Rs.20,000/- for wet lands. He also filed Ex.B2 i.e. certified copy of

order in O.P.No.195 of 1989 and that he is the claimant No.21 in

the said OP.

c) RW3 is the resident of Yamcha and his land was also

submerged under the SRSP project. He is the claimant No.6 in the

present OP and deposed that he used to raise double crop paddy in

the acquired land.

d) The evidence of these witnesses cannot be dislodged as there

is no rebuttal evidence by the respondents.

e) A perusal of Exs.B1 and B2 establish the said fact as

deposed by the witnesses i.e. RWs 1 and 2.

f) Ex.B1 reveals that it is the order dated 23.12.1992 passed in

O.P.No.81 of 1989 by the learned Additional District Judge,

Nizamabad, wherein the land was acquired for the purpose of

approach road to the bridge across river Godavari and the Land

Acquisition Officer has granted a compensation of Rs.17,000/- per

acre. On reference to the learned Additional District Judge, the

reference Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.20,000/-

per acre.

AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

g) A perusal of Ex.B2 reveals that it is the order passed in

O.P.No.195 of 1989 by the Additional District Judge, Nizamabad

on 13.11.1991, wherein the land was acquired for Sriramsagar

Project and the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded Rs.7,500/-

per acre for wet lands and Rs.3,000/- per acre for dry lands. On

being referred by the Land Acquisition Officer, the reference Court

has enhanced the compensation to Rs.17,000/- for dry lands and

Rs.19,000/- per acre for wet lands.

h) Thus, the claimants could prove their case that their

acquired lands fetch more value and that the compensation

awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is very meager.

Considering the evidence on the record, it is held that the

claimants are entitled to the compensation of Rs.17,000/- per acre

as granted by the reference Court. Therefore, the reference Court

was justified in enhancing the compensation to Rs.17,000/- per

acre. Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

12. POINT NO.2:

In view of the reasoned finding arrived at Point No.1, this

Court holds that the judgment and decree of the reference Court do

not need any interference.

AKS,J & ETD,J LAAS No.682_2011

13. POINT NO.3:

In the result, the appeal is dismissed upholding the

judgment and decree dated 13.04.1999 passed in O.P.No.610 of

1991 by the learned Additional District Judge, Nizamabad. No

costs.