APHC010473732023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAQ^ AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGAD/^ WRIT APPEAL NO: 810 OF 2025 ^ Writ Appeal under clause ifof the Letters Patent to allow the present writ appeal by setting aside the order in W.P.No. 13340 of 2019 dated 23-08- 2023 passed by the learned single judge and to allow the said writ petition • Between: 1. V Masthan, S/o Ramaiah, aged about 66 years, Occ. business, R/o 3- 348, Nethaji Road, Sathyavedu Town and Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. D. Ravi Kumar Reddy, S/o D.Ramchandra Reddy, aged about 33 R/o Obularajukandriga Village, Sathyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District. r' years. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.b y its Principal Secretary, Land Acquisition Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District. 3. The Specifiai Deputy Collector, (Land Acquisition), 4. Telugu Ganga Project, Nellore, SPS Nellore District. 5. The Tahsildar, Sathyavedu, Chittoor District. 6. The Deputy Executive Engineer, NTR Telugu Ganga Sub-Division, Irrigation Department, Sathyavedu, Chittoor District. ...Respondents lA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 to suspend the operation of order in W.P.No. 13340 of 2019 dated 23.08.2023 in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI MADHU SUDHAN P Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 3: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondents No.2, 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.4, 6: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD The Court made the following order: APHC010473732O23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0M0 [3541] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT APPEAL NO: 810/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to allow the present writ appeal by setting aside the order in W.P.No. 13340 of 2019 dated 23-08- 2023 passed by the learned single judge and to allow the said writ petition as prayed for and pass Between: 1.V MASTHAN, S/0 RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/0 3-348, NETHAJI ROAD, SATHYAVEDU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2.. D.RAVI KUMAR REDDY,, S/0 D.RAMCHANDRA REDDY, AGED R/0 OBULARAJUKANDRIGA VILLAGE, ABOUT 33 YEARS, SATHYAVEDU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...APPELLANTS(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, VEIAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3.THE SPECIFIAI DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (LAND ACQUISTION), 4.TELUGU GANGA PROJECT, NELLORE, SPS NELLORE DISTRICT. 5.THE TAHSILDAR, SATHYAVEDU, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2 RRR, J & JS, J W.A.No.810of2025 - 6.THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NTR TELUGU GANGA SUB DIVISION, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, SATHYAVEDU, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): lA NO; 1 OF 2025 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 Pleased to condone the delay of ( 607) days in representing the above W.A.S.R.No.38109/2023 in W.P.No. 13340/2019 and pass lA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 pleased to suspend the operation of order in W.P.No. 13340 of 2019 dated 23.08.2023 in the interest of justice, and pass Counsel for the Appellants{S): 1.MADHU SUDHAN P Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1 .GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.GPFOR1RRI ANDCAD 3 RRR, J&JSJ W.A.No.810of2025 The Court made the following Judgment: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri P. Madhu Sudhan, learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, appearing for the official respondents. 2. The appellants herein had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.13340 of 2019, contending that the Irrigation Authorities and the Revenue Authorities have unilaterally demolished the compound wall built by them in Ac.1.48 cents of land in Sy.No.352/8A of Sathyavedu Village and Mandal, Chittoor District, and the same has been done without notice and without any opportunity being given to them. The respondents had thereafter filed their counter affidavits. In 3. this counter affidavit, it is stated that the entire extent of Ac.1.48 cents of land in Sy.No.352/8A had been acquired, by way of acquisition under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Srikalahasthi, for the Telugu Ganga Project. It is further stated that an award, bearing No.5/87, dated 14.08.1987, was passed and compensation was paid in respect of the land to an extent of Ac. 1.10 cents to appellant and 0.04 cents to the father of the 2"'^ appellant. The compensation relating to the remaining 0.34 cents of land was deposited in the Civil Court, in as much as there was a dispute about the person who is entitled for payment of such compensation. It is further stated that the St the 1 4 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No.810 of 2025 petitioners therein had received the compensation under protest and had sent notices dated 14.08.1987, seeking a reference to the Civil Court for enhancement of compensation. The counter affidavit filed by the 4'^ respondent, had also stated that the land had been handed over to the Irrigation Department, 04.09.1987 and the same was also implemented in the Adangal, in the year 1987 itself. Thereafter, the Assistant Executive Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, Satyavedu, in his letter, dated 03.09.2019, requested for conduct of survey boundaries to ascertain the encroachment of land which had been vested with the State. On this request, the Mandal Surveyor and the Village Revenue Officer, Satyavedu, are said to have measured and fixed the boundaries after notices were published relating to the said survey and demolition was taken up thereafter. 4. on 5. A learned Single Judge of this Court, after noticing these facts, had dismissed the Writ Petition, by way of an order, dated 23.08.2023. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Appeal. Sri P. Madhu Sudhan, learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the possession of the land had never been handed over to the Irrigation Department and that the appellants had always remained in possession of the land. He would further submit that Section 24 (2) of the 7. 5 RRR, J&JS,J W.A.No.810of2025 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (Act 30 of 2013) stipulates that acquisition of land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, would lapse either if compensation has not been paid or possession of the land had not been taken. The learned counsel would also contend that no notice was received by the appellants before the compound wall had been demolished after the survey. 8. The applicability of Section 24 (2) of Act 30 of 2013 had been decided by a Full-Bench of the Flon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Indore Development Authority vs Manoharlal and Ors. Etc\ In this Judgment, the Flon’ble Supreme Court had held that Section 24 (2) of Act 30 of 2013 would be applicable only when both conditions- non-payment of compensation and possession of the land not being taken - are found to be applicable. In the present case, compensation has been paid and though the 9. appellants dispute the taking over possession of the land, the provisions of Section 24 would not be applicable to this case. On the question of proper notice being given to the appellants, it 10. is clear from the proceedings, placed before this Court, that the appellants have been issued notices to the survey and the steps of demolition of the wall was taken up only after such survey had been conducted after notice. '2020 (8) see 129 6 RRR, J&JSJ W.A.No.810of2025 . 11. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge, and this Writ Appeal is accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ICER S To. 1. One CC to SRI MADHU SUDHAN P Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Two CCs to GP FOR IRRI AND CAD High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies GSG HIGH COURT DATED: 21/07/2025 ORDER WANO. 810 OF 2025 DISMISSING THE WA WITHOUT COSTS