1 APHC010269612020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 17782/2020 Between: 1. G VENKATAPPA REDDY, S/O. GOVINDA REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. 4-5-31/A, SRI SAI NILAYAM, VIDHYANAGAR, GUNTUR. 2. VANGA APPI REDDY, S/O. BHADRA REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/O. 6-15, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR. 3. VANGA KOTI REDDY, S/O. SAMBI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. 5-47, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. VANGA SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. SESHIREDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. 6-14, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. GUDIVARTHI SUBBA REDDY, S/O. KOTI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, R/O.9-25, LAM, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. VANGA KASI VISWANADHA REDDY, S/O. SESHI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. 6-14, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 7. ALLA APPI REDDY, S/O. PANAKALA REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/O.1-81A, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 8. VANGA VENKATA REDDY, S/O. NAGIREDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT77 YEARS, R/O.4-45, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR, GUNTUR 2 DISTRICT. 9. VANGA SESHI REDDY, S/O. NAGI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O.4-10, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 10. VANGA SIVARAMI REDDY, S/O. NAGI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. NEAR SCHOOL, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR. 11. DEVAGIRI VEERA RAGHAVA REDDY,, 5/0. REDDAMMA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/O.4-35, JONNALAGADDA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 12. VINTHA BHAGAVAN REDDY, S/O. AMMI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O.26-41-103/1A, VENKATA KRISHNA COLONY, 4TH LANE, AT AGRAHARAM, GUNTUR. 13. VANGA SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. V. SAMBI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RIO.4-3-117, RAMANNAPET, 1/3 KORITEPADU, GUNTUR. 14. VANGA RAVI SANKAR REDDY, S/O. SAMBI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RIO. FLAT NO.205, CVR RESIDENCY, ANJANEYAPETA, KORITEPADU, GUNTUR. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL TAHSILDAR, TADIKONDA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION CIRCLE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DIVISION, GUNTUR. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying compensation to the petitioners for acquisition of lands to an extent of Ac.12.45 cents in D.Nos.183, 185, 190, 192 of Lam Village, Tadikonda Mandal, Guntur District under land acquisition Act 1 of 1984 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners for the above said lands by initiating fresh acquisition proceedings in terms of Section 24 of The Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 by fixing a time limit and exercising continuous mandamus in view of violation of the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased phased to direct the respondents to initiate fresh land acquisition proceedings in terms of The Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 forthwith and to complete the same and pay compensation to the petitioners acquired in D.Nos.183, 185, 190, 192 etc covering an extent of Ac.12.45 cents of Lam Village, Tadikonda Mandal, Guntur District acquired by under Section 4(1) of the earlier Land Acquisition Act, dated 15-12-1983 pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP) The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying compensation to the petitioners for acquisition of lands to an extent of Ac.12.45 cents in D.Nos.183, 185, 190, 192 of Lam Village, Tadikonda Mandal, Guntur District under land acquisition Act 1 of 1984 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners for the above said lands by initiating fresh acquisition proceedings in terms of Section 24 of The Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 by fixing a time limit and exercising continuous mandamus in view of violation of the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and pass….” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the land to an extent of Acs.12.45 cents in D.Nos.183, 185, 190, 192 etc, of Lam village, Tadikonda mandal, Guntur district belongs to the petitioners and the same was acquired for development of Kondaveeti Vagu (Neeru Konda) drain from Km.0.00 to 0.800 and 0.800 to Km.1.600(Neerukonda drain) which flows through the said village. Advance possession was taken in the year 1980 and a notification under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was approved on 15.12.1983, subsequently, an award was passed in the year 1986. In spite of the said award, the petitioners were not paid the award amounts. 3. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they made several requests to the respondent authorities, no action is being initiated by the respondent 5 authorities for paying compensation to the petitioners for acquiring their lands. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The 6th respondent herein has filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that in the year 1980, proposals for acquiring the land in S.Nos.168 and others of Lam village of Tadikonda mandal were initiated for developing Kondaveeti vagu drain. The Irrigation department has taken possession of the lands prior to the issuance of land acquisition proposals and subsequently, land acquisition proposals were filed and accordingly, draft notification was approved on 28.04.1983 and the same was published in District Gazette on 15.12.1983. Thereafter, notification under Section 6 of Act No.1 of 1989 was also approved on 28.04.1983 and was published in District Gazette on 15.12.1983. An award enquiry was conducted on 04.11.1985 and the same was approved on 21.03.1986 duly fixing the market value @Rs.10,000/- per acre, but, the Irrigation department has not provided funds for execution of the said award. It is further stated that, thereafter, the Executive Engineer, Irrigation department, vide letter dated 14.05.1991, filed a revised land plan schedules to an extent of Acs.11.72 cents which was occupied by the Irrigation department for improvement of Kondaveeti Vagu drain, duly informing that the previous proposals may be treated as cancelled as no compensation was paid up to 1986. Basing on the said letter, the land acquisition officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur were addressed a letter by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Guntur with a request to provide funds for re-initiation of land acquisition proceedings, vide letter dated 06.02.1993 and a reminder on 13.04.1993. 6 5. It is further stated that in the year 1994, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur has addressed a letter dated 04.10.1994 to the Deputy Executive Engineer, Guntur requesting to deposit an amount of Rs.4,08,000/- towards cost of land acquisition and accordingly, an estimate for Rs.6,00,000/- was sanctioned vide CR.No.:37/94-95 towards cost of land acquisition of Kondaveeti vagu from Km.0.000 to 8.007 in Lam village, Guntur district. Thereafter, a bill for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was issued in favour of Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur to Pay and Accounts Officer, Works and Project, Guntur for processing the said payment, but, the said bill was returned on the ground that the Government has issued ban on payment of bills. 6. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that continuous efforts are being made by the respondents for payment of compensation to the beneficiaries and that the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation circle, Guntur was requested to obtain necessary permission from the competent authority for fresh acquisition proceedings for the lands taken into possession at Lam village of Tadikonda mandal under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 7. Heard Sri. Raja Reddy Koneti, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation. 8. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader has produced a copy of the instructions of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur dated 09.09.2025 which is on similar lines as that of the 7 counter affidavit filed by the respondents. However, a letter in Rc.No.1130/1991-J, dated 04.09.2025 addressed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur to Executive Engineer, Irrigation circle, Guntur was also furnished by the learned Assistant Government Pleader wherein it was stated that the probable cost of acquisition of the subject lands is Rs.10,99,92,039/- and as such requested the Executive Engineer to provide funds for initiating necessary steps as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 9. Admittedly, the petitioners herein are having lands to a total extent of Acs.12.45 cents in D.Nos.183, 185, 190 etc., in Lam village, Tadikond mandal, Guntur district which were acquired for development of Kondaveeti Vagu in the year 1980 itself and accordingly, an award was passed in the year 1986 granting compensation to the petitioners. Though the respondent authorities have initiated proceedings from time to time for paying compensation to the petitioners, till date, the petitioners were not paid the said compensation. 10. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, came into force with effect from 01.01.2014 as per which, in a case where land acquisition proceedings were initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and an award under Section 11 has been passed about five years or more from the date of commencement of the Act, but, the compensation has not been paid, then, the said proceedings shall be considered to be lapsed and if required, fresh land acquisition proceedings shall be initiated in accordance with the Right to Fair Compensation 8 and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, reads as under: “(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894),where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act” 11. In the case on hand, though the award in favour of the petitioners was passed way back in the year 1986 and as the same was not implemented, the said acquisition proceedings shall be considered as lapsed. Accordingly, fresh proceedings shall be initiated under the new Act and the compensation should be paid to the petitioners in accordance with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 12. In view of the foregoing discussion, the respondent authorities are directed to pay the compensation to the petitioners as per their eligibility by initiating fresh acquisition proceedings in terms of Section 24 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The said process shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9 13. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :09.09.2025. Gss