IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 12364 OF 2022 Between: 1. P China Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Late Narasimham, Agedabout 60 Yrs, Occ: Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda, H/o. Etimoga, Nagayalanka Mandal Krishna District. 2. P.Swarajyam, W/o. P.ChinaVenkateswara Rao , Aged about 55 Yrs Occ: Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda, H/o. Etimoga,Nagayalanka Mandal Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. P.Nani Babu, S/o. P.Sambasiva Rao Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda,H/o. Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. P. Venkateswaramma, W/o. P.Nani Babu, Aged about Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. Aged about 28 Yrs, Occ: Etimoga,Nagayalanka Mandal, 25 Yrs, Occ: H/o. Etimoga,Nagayalanka Mandal, 5. P.VeeraRaghavaiah, S/o. P.Yesu Babu ^ . Aged about 36 Yrs, Occ: Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda, H/o. Etimoga.Nagayalanka Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. Mandal, 6. P.Meri, W/o. P.VeeraRaghavaiah, Aged about 31 Yrs, Occ: Fishermen, R/o. Gullalamoda,H/o. Etimoga,Nagayalanka Mandal, Krishna District Andhra Pradesh. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur, Andhra 2. The District Collector, Krishna District Revenue Pradesh. Machilipatnam, A.P. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Avanigadda 4^ The Tahsildar, Nagayalanka Mandal a:r. Krishna District,d A.P. Nagayalanka, Krishna District, hi ^ ...RESPONDENTS of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ order of direction nature of Writ of Mandamus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution '»■ V may more particularly one in the any other appropriate Writ, order the 2^^ Respondent in refusing to or or direction, declaring that the action of consider the Petitioners for the of their lands compensation/ex-gratia amount in respect an extent of Ac. 15.00 cts in S.No.636 in Gullalamoda, H/o. Etimoga, Nagayalanka Mandal Krishna District by the 2nd Respondent under their Proceedings of the Collector and District Magistrate, Krishna Machilipatnam, vide File No.REV-ESEC0ALN(ALN)8/2018-SA-(E1)-KCO, dated. 15/03/2022, as illegal, arbitrary and also violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India 21 and and consequently, set aside the same and direct the Respondent Authorities to grant compensation/ex-gratia amount to the Petitioners with respect to the Petitioners lands an extent of Ac. 15.00 cts in S.No.636 in Gullalamoda, Mandal, Krishna District H/o. Etimoga, Nagayalanka par with the other eligible persons/Petitioners 37012/2017 on WP.Nos.30027/2017 compensation. in and 41463/2017 for the lA NO: 1 OF 7r\oo Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed in pleased to set aside the praying that in the circumstances support of the petition, the High Court may be same and direct the Respondent Authorities to grant compensation/ex-gratia amount to the Petitioners with respect to the '^5 00 cts in S.No.636 in Gullalamoda, H/o: Etimoga, Nagayalanka Mandal, Petitioners lands Krishna District on par with the other eligible persons/Petitioners in WP.Nos.30027/2017 41463/2017 for the compensation. 37012/2017 & Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHANNAIR RAJEEV KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010191472022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] 0l.^ivn TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 12364/2022 Between: P China Venkateswara Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.MOHANNAIR RAJEEV KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order; The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the nd respondent, vide File No.REV- proceedings issued by the 2 ESEC0ALN(ALN)8/2018-SA-(E1 )KCO, wherein the case of the petitioners was rejected for payment of dated 15.03.2022 compensation. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they belong to the fisherman community, and are eking out their livelihood by catching fish. It is stated that, except the said avocation, they did not have any other source of income. It is further case of the petitioners that they occupied the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.15.00 cents in Sy.No.636 of Gullalamoda, H/o; Etimoga, Nagayalanka Mandal, Krishna District, and converted the subject land into fish ponds and doing aquaculture. It is further stated that, they are paying land tax to the respondents. While things identified for stood thus, the land occupied by them was establishment of Missile Research Centre by Defense Research Development organization (DRDO). While sending the proposals, the respondents conducted a survey so as to pay compensation to the persons, who are in occupation of the proposed land, and prepared a list of beneficiaries to pay compensation. But in the said list, the names of the petitioners did not appear. In those 3 circumstances, the petitioners claim that they have made several representations to the respondents including registered notice dated 02.07.2016. As there was no response from the respondents, the petitioners approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition, vide W.P.No.15756 of 2018, questioning the action of the respondents in not paying compensation. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 20.12.2021, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 20.02.2021, submitted by the petitioners, in accordance with law within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of the Thereafter, the order. said 2""^ respondent, after putting the petitioners on notice, passed impugned order dated 15.03.2022, whereunder the case of the petitioners was rejected. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. The respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the names of the petitioners were not entered as encroachers, either in the first list containing 112 beneficiaries or in the final list containing 157 beneficiaries. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the list of beneficiaries were prepared after 3. conducting Grama Sabha on 27.01.2012 and 15.03.2018. It is 4 further stated that, the petitioners did not produce any documents in support of their claim over the subject land. The petitioners filed additional documents, enclosing copies of the beneficiaries prepared by the respondents for payment of compensation. It is further case of the petitioner that, initially, a list for 112 beneficiaries was prepared, and thereafter, the number of beneficiaries increased in the final list. As such, they requests this Court to give a direction to include the name of the petitioners in the list of beneficiaries and to extend the benefit of payment of compensation. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned 5. Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. Perused the materials available on record. 6. It is not in dispute that, pursuant to the order 7. dated 20.12.2021 passed in W.P.No.15756 of 2018, the 2"^^^ respondent issued notices to the petitioners, asking them to produce the documentary evidence to show that they were in possession of land admeasuring an extent of Ac. 15.00 cents in Sy.No.636 of Gullalamoda, H/o; Etimoga, Nagayalanka Mandal, Krishna District, and the petitioners gave a statement on 14.02.2022, saying that they did not have any documentary 5 evidence except the tax receipts paid in the year 1990 and 1994. No documentary proof was filed by the petitioners either before respondent or before this Court to establish that they were in possession of the subject land before the same was resumed. In the absence of any material available on record, it can be said that the petitioners are not in possession of the subject land. Apart from the same, the list of beneficiaries was prepared in the 2012 & 2018, after conducting Grama Sabha in which, the of the petitioners’ did not appear. It is for the petitioners to establish before this Court that they were in possession of the subject land before the same was resumed by the Government. As already noted supra, nothing is placed on record in support of their claim. nd the 2 year names In view of the same, the order impugned dated 15.03.2022 does not warrant any interference by this Court, and there is illegality or infirmity in the said order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 8. no SD/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri Mohannair Rajeev Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:25/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.12364 of 2022 DISMISSING THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS