APHC010125122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 6819/2025 Between: Shaik Amirun ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DHARANI KUMAR B Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue any order or direction one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the acts of the respondents in not referring the lands in Sy.No. 164-2 and 165-2 of Vempalli Revenue Village and Mandal, YSR District sought for Land Acquisition vide 3G Notification S.O. 5003 (E) dated 05.1.2024 to the Reference Authority under Sec.64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to refer the lands in Sy.No.164-2 and 165-2 of Vempalli Revenue Village and Mandal YSR District sought for Land Acquisition vide 3G Notification S.O.5003 (E) dated 05.1.2024 to the Reference Authority in terms of Sec 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders...” 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 3.15 cents in Sy. No. 165 and Ac.0.68 cents out of Ac. 2.72 cents in Sy.No.164 situated in Vempalle Village and Mandal, YSR District. While things stood thus, the 3rd respondent issued a notification under Section 3G of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, for the acquisition of land, including the land belonging to the petitioner. It is observed that, in the acquisition notice, with respect to Sy. No. 164/2, land admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 0.61 cents is shown in the revenue records in the name of a third party as pattadar, even though the petitioner is the original pattadar of the subject property. There exists a dispute between the petitioner and the said third party regarding the title over the subject land in Sy. No. 164/2. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite the petitioner having participated in the award enquiry and submitted her objections, the respondent authorities are proceeding to pass an award and deposit the compensation amount into the account of a third party, treating the said third party as the pattadar and title holder of the property. It is further submitted that, without considering the petitioner’s objections, the respondents are proceeding with the passing of the award without referring the matter for adjudication under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which is contrary to law. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents submits that a reference under Section 64 of the Act would arise only after the passing of the award, and only if the petitioner had submitted written objections, such objections would be considered by the competent authority, i.e., the 3rd and 4th respondents herein, and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, without considering the objections or award can be passed with regard to subject property. But no objections as such were received from the petitioner. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Land Acquisition) appearing for the respondents, and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition can be disposed of, by directing the petitioner to submit detailed objections along with documents if any to the 3rd and 4th respondents within a period of three (03) weeks from the receipt of the copy of this order. Upon receipt of such objections, the 3rd and 4th respondents shall consider the same, and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to other stakeholders, if any, more particularly, the person whose name is mutated in the revenue records as original pattadar in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 0.61 cents in Sy. No. 164/2 as per the acquisition notice and pass appropriate orders within a period of four (4) weeks, subject to the condition that the award has not been passed as on today. 6. With the above said direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 04.04.2025 kkllkk 186 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.6819 of 2025 04.04.2025 kkllkk