Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13145 (AP)

The Special Deputy Collector v. Guduru Uma Maheswara Rao,

LAAS/42/2021 · 2025-08-27

Ninala Jayasurya, Tuhin Kumar Gedela

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010157242021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No.42 OF 2021 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District ...Petitioner AND Guduru Uma Maheswara Rao, S/o Subbanna, R/o.Giddaluru Village, Sanjamala Mandal, Kurnool District ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellant : The G.P. for Appeals Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. K.Rathanga Pani Reddy The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) Heard Mr.S.Bala Mohan, learned Government Pleader representing the appellant. Also heard Mr.S.Chandra Sekhara Reddy, learned counsel representing the respondent/claimant. 2. Aggrieved by the orders dated 07.9.2015 in L.A.O.P. No.18 of 2013 on the file of the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, the State preferred the present appeal. 3. For excavation of Owk Reservoir Complex Stage–II of Srisailam Right Bank Canal (SRBC) at Cherlopalli, several extents of lands were 2 LAAS_42_2021 acquired. As a part of the said Project, a draft notification for acquisition of an extent of Acs.14.84 cents situated in various survey numbers of Cherlopalli Village belonging to the respondent and others under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was issued on 12.8.2005 and the draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 14.8.2025. The Land Acquisition Officer classified the acquired lands into three categories i.e., (1) Rain-fed dry lands, (2) Dry lands having mining potentiality, and (3) Lands irrigated with the water drawn from Bugganala and the farmers’ own bore-wells, and fixed the market value @ Rs.46,000/-, Rs.1,04,000/- and Rs.72,000/- per acre respectively. Dissatisfied with the fixation of the market value by the Land Acquisition Officer, the respondent/claimant sought enhancement of market value @ Rs.10,00,000/- per acre by filing petition under Section 18 of the Act. Before the Reference Court, on behalf of the Referring Officer no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. On behalf of the respondent/claimant, the claimant himself was examined as R.W.1 and Exs.B.1 and B.2 i.e., Certified Copy of the common order in O.P. No.41 of 2007 and batch dated 26.2.2010 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Nandyal and Certified Copy of the common order in O.P. No.432 of 2008 and batch dated 28.2.2014 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Nandyal respectively were marked. The learned Reference Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence, enhanced the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.3,78,880/- per acre as against Rs.10,00,000/- per acre claimed by the respondent/claimant. The present appeal came to be filed against the said enhancement. 4. Though the learned Government Pleader sought to advance arguments with reference to the grounds raised in the Memorandum of Appeal, in the light of the decision of this Court dated 18.7.2025 in 3 LAAS_42_2021 L.A.A.S. No.623 of 2011 and batch, which was delivered with reference to acquisition of land for the very same project i.e., for excavation of Owk Reservoir Complex Stage–II of SRBC at Cherlopalli Village, the matter need not be dealt with in detail. In respect of acquisition of the land situated in the very same Village i.e., Cherlopalli and for the very same Project pursuant to Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 24.2.2005, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.25/2005–’06 on 27.2.2006 fixing the market value of the acquired lands as in the present case. Aggrieved by the said fixation, the said owners/claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and the learned Reference Court by common order dated 26.2.2010 fixed the market value @ Rs.3,78,880/- per acre basing on the judgment dated 26.3.2007 in A.S. No.1748 of 2005. The State carried the matter by way of statutory appeals vide L.A.A.S. No.623 of 2011 and batch. Initially the said batch of appeals were allowed by a common order dated 28.4.2016 and the market value was reduced to Rs.2,73,000/- per acre from Rs.3,78,880/- per acre. The respondents/claimants in the said batch of appeals carried the matter to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.5228–5229 of 2017. However the Hon’ble Apex Court while permitting withdrawal of the said SLPs, granted liberty for filing review petitions. 5. A Coordinate Bench of this Court examined the review petitions in I.A.Nos.1 of 2017 etc., filed pursuant to the said orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by a common order dated 18.7.2025 allowed the Review Petitions by recalling the common judgment dated 28.4.2016 in L.A.A.S. No.623 of 2011 & batch and thereby confirmed the order of Reference Court enhancing the compensation to Rs.3,78,880/- per acre. 4 LAAS_42_2021 6. In view of the said order, which is applicable to the facts of the case and for the reasons alike, the appeal preferred by the State is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J ____________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J August 28, 2025 vasu