APHC010203472015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3549] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 225/2015 Between: 1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTORCUM-LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,, SRISAILAM RIGHT BANK CANAL, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. GORLA RANGAMMA, W/o.Balaiah Aged 50 years, Agriculturist Resident of Cherlopalli Village, Owk Mandal. Kurnool District ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1. GP FOR APPEALS (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY The Court made the following: 2 NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S.No.225 of 2015 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) Aggrieved by the Order, dated 28.02.2014 in L.A.O.P.No.432 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, the State preferred the present appeal. 2. Heard Sri S.Bala Mohan Rao, learned Government Pleader for Appeals, and learned counsel for the respondent/claimant. 3. For the purpose of excavation of Owk Reservoir, Complex Stage-II of Srisailam Right Branch Canal (SRBC), an extent of Ac.1.45 cents situated in Cherlopalli village belonging to the respondent/claimant was acquired pursuant to a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 20.08.2005. Several extents of land situated in the same village were acquired through different notifications. In so far as the subject matter land is concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer classified the same as dry land and fixed the compensation @ Rs.46,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said fixation, the respondents/claimants, invoking Section 18 of the Act and sought compensation @ Rs.10,00,000/- per acre. 4. Before the learned Reference Court, on behalf of the respondents/claimants, R.W.1 to R.W.3 were examined and Exs.B1 to B8 were marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, no oral evidence was adduced, but Exs.A1 to A3 were marked with consent. 5. The learned Reference Court, after considering the material on record, both oral and documentary, determined the compensation @Rs.3,70,000/- per acre. 6. At the time of hearing of the present appeal, it is brought to the notice of this Court that a Division Bench of this Court, in which one of us (NJS,J) is a member, while considering a batch of review petitions filed by the respondents/claimants in the appeals filed by the State, upheld the compensation fixed by the Reference Court @ Rs.3,70,000/- per acre and 3 NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S.No.225 of 2015 allowed the review petitions by order dated 18.07.2025, and dismissed the appeals preferred by the State. 7. From a perusal of the said order, it is evident that the said batch of appeals are in respect of the very same project and award in respect of the lands therein is passed on 27.02.2006 vide Award No.25/2005-06. A detailed order was passed in the said batch of cases, wherein the compensation enhanced by the learned Reference Court was upheld, and the appeals preferred by the State were dismissed. The said order is squarely applicable to the case on hand and, therefore, for the reasons alike, the present appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J _______________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J Date : 09.10.2025 BMS