1 APHC010248192018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 10971/2018 Between: 1. K. VENKATA SUBBA REDDY,, S/O. K. CHINNA KONDA REDDY, AGE 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/93, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 2. CHEMIKALA BALANAGI REDDY,, S/O. C. VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.1/30, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 3. BEERAM YERRAIAH GARI RAMA KRISHNA REDDY,, S/O. B. CHINNA ESWARA REDDY, AGE. 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/34, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 4. KASIREDDY SINGAPORE BALA VENKATA SUBBA REDDY,, S/O. B.S. SUBBI REDDY, AGE. 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/137, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 5. T. UMA MAHESWARA REDDY,, S/O. T. JAARAMI REDDY, AGE. 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FORMER, R/O. DOOR NO.1/44, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, 2 YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 6. DUDDELA SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. D. VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGE. 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.1/64, J.KOTAPALLE VILLAGE, PEDDA MUDIAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 7. KASIREDDY KONDA REDDY,, S/O. K. BALA KONDA REDDY, AGE. 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.3-114A, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 8. KASIREDDY SINGAPURU ESWARAMMA,, W/O. KASIREDDY KONDA REDDY, AGE. 48YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 9. CHEMIKALA CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY,, S/O. C. SUBBIREDDY, AGE. 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.16/32, SAI KUTEER ROAD, GUDAVARAM VILLAGE, GUDAVARAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 10. NAGELLA CHINNA SUBBAIAH,, S/O. NAGELLA NARASANNA, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/42, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 11. KASIREDDY LAKSHMI DEVI,, W/O. K. NARASIMHA REDDY, AGE. 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, RIO. DOOR NO.156-B, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 12. KAVALAKUNTLA SANKARAMMA,, W/O. K. NARASIMHA REDDY, AGE. 60YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, RIO. DOOR NO.1/60, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 13. NAGELLA ANKANNA,, S/O. N. NARASANNA, AGE. 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, RIO. DOOR NO.16/26-1- 3 UP, SAIKUTEER ROAD, GUPAVARAM VILLAGE, PRODDATUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 14. NAGELLA NARASANNA,, S/O. NAGELLA ANKANNA, AGE. 80 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/36, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. 15. NAGELLA SUBBAMMA,, W/O. N. NARASANNA, AGE. 72 YEARS, OCCUPATION. FARMER, R/O. DOOR NO.2/36, PARLAPADU VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT (LAND ACQUISITION), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE SPL DY COLLECTOR LA, G.N.S.S., UNIT-1, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, A.P. 5. THE TAHSILDAR/ MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 4 1. B RACHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP) 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard Mr.Shaik Md.Umar Abdullah, learned counsel representing Ms.B.Rachna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Dilip Nayak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, representing the respondents. 2. The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that the respondents are trying to dig the flood flow canal through their agricultural lands by paying partial compensation, though the land acquisition notification was lapsed and by changing the alignment. They also seek a direction to the respondents to reacquire the lands, the details of which are set out in Page No.78 of the material papers. Along with the petition, they filed miscellaneous application, I.A.No.1 of 2018, seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to refrain from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in respect of the lands, which are mentioned in the annexure. 5 3. The matter was listed for admission, as seen from the proceeding sheet, on 03.04.2018 and no interim order was granted. Be that as it may. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has advanced arguments with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. However, this Court, in the light of the specific averments made in the counter-affidavit of the 4th respondent, to which no reply affidavit is filed, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without going into the various contentions raised in the writ petition. 5. As seen from the counter-affidavit, it is discernible that the petitioners have agreed for passing a consent award. The compensation was paid to them on different dates. It would also appear that the possession of the land was taken on different dates and handed over to the Requisitioning Department. The relevant paragraphs of the counter reads as follows: 9. It is submitted that all the land owners/interested persons have represented before the Land Acquisition Officer and requested for fixation of Market Value to their lands under acquisition through the District Level Negotiation Committee (DLNC). The District Collector fixed the Market Value of lands @ Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre. The Ryots received 80% of the Market Value as fixed by the District Collector and the proposal was sent to State Level Negotiation Committee. 10. It is submitted that the State Level Negotiation Committee approved consent value @Rs.2,00,000/- per 6 acre to Category-I lands and Rs.1,50,000/- per acre to Category-II lands. 11. It is submitted that Consent Awards were passed vide No.3/2009-10 dated 04.07.2009, No.5/2009-10 dated 19.08.2009 and No.6/2009-10 dated 02.09.2009 by the then Special Deputy Collector (L.A), G.N.S.S., unit-I, Nandyal to an extent of Ac.35.91 cents, Ac.11.77 cents and Ac.2.37 cents respectively. 12. It is submitted that all the petitioners lands are in Vellala Village only. After passing the three consent awards, the deferential amount of compensation was also paid to the petitioners on 04.07.2009, 06.08.2009, 19.08.2009 and 02.09.2009. 13. In reply to Para No 4, it is submitted that in the instant case, Land Acquisition proceedings were initiated under the Land Acquisition Act 1894. Award under the said Section 11 was made in the year 2009-10. Physical possession of the land was taken on 09.06.2008, 10.07.2008 and 17.07.2008 and the land was handed over the Requisitioning Department. Further, land compensation was paid to the awardees in full as per the consent awards passed.” 6. Once the consent award is passed, it is not open to the land owners to re-agitate the matter. 7. In the Special Collector v. Gorla Yerikalaiah(W.A.No.66 of 2024), the learned Division Bench of this Court inter alia held as follows: “9. It is settled law that compensation under the Land Acquisition Act,1894 is to be calculated on the basis of the market value of the property as on the date of publication of the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act. It appears that the valuation was done on the basis of the SSR rates of the year 2002-2003 while the notification was issued in 2005. In the normal course, the respondents would have been entitled to claim enhanced compensation. However, in the present case, the 7 respondents had entered into an agreement with the Land Acquisition Officer giving an undertaking that additional compensation would not be claimed and consenting to the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, on the basis of 2002-2003 SSR rates. 10. In the case of State of Karnataka and Anr., vs. Singappa Dyavappa Biradar and Ors((1995) 5 SCC 746), lands were acquired from the land holders on the basis of negotiations with regard to the price of the lands and consent awards were passed on the basis of such negotiations. The land holders, after receiving the compensation, moved applications for reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, for enhanced compensation. This application was rejected by the Collector and writ petitions were filed against such order of rejection. The writ petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judge holding that such a reference would be impermissible. The Division Bench of the High Court reversed the order of the learned Single Judge. An appeal was filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order of the Division Bench. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, after considering the provisions of the 1894 Act, had held that no reference for enhanced compensation can be made after a consent award had been passed. A Division Bench of this Court, in similar circumstances, following the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Gujarat and Ors., vs. DayaShamji Bhai and Ors.,2, held that no further claim for compensation can be made once a consent award has been agreed by the land holders under Section 11(2) of the 1894 Act. There is no dispute that the award, in the present case, is a consent award, though Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy disputes the scope of consent. 11. In the circumstances, the Writ Appeal is allowed……” 8. In the light of the above stated position and payment of compensation in terms of the consent awards, the relief sought by the petitioners deserves no consideration. Non-filing of reply to the counter-affidavit amounts to admission of the specific assertions made therein. 8 9. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date: 31.12.2025 Pab 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 10971/2018 DATE: 31.12.2025 Pab