APHC010476812024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24520/2024 Between: 1. ISARAPU PERUMAL RAO, S/O. APPA RAO, AGED 76 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 50-7-27, GOLLAVEEDHI, SEETHAMPETA, AKKAYYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VMRDA, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, (FORMERLY VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY), REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER), VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (VMRDA), (FORMERLY VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY), VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, (FORMERLY VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION), VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS 2 COMMISSIONER. ...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 topleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent 2 to 4 herein in not considering the representation of the petitioner under receipt dated 24.03.2022 for payment of compensation for the acquired land in an extent of 871 square yards in Survey Number 40 and 40 and 40/1B of Gandhi Nagar, Resapuvaripalem, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh as well as in not obeying the orders passed in WP No. 20409 of 2008 for consideration of the case of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and also oppose to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India as well as oppose to all cannons of justice and also contemptuous in nature consequentially direct the respondents more particularly respondents 2 to 4 herein to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of compensation by duly considering the representation dated 24.03.2022 as well as the orders passed in WP No. 20409 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008 forthwith as per Act 30 of 2013 The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act further, direct the 1st respondent to take stringent action against the respondents 2 to 4 herein for disobedience of the orders of this Honorable Court in WP No. 20409 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008 as well as in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2022 in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 direct the respondents more particularly respondents 2 to 4 herein to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of compensation by duly considering the representation dated 24.03.2022 as well as the orders passed in WP No. 20409 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008 forthwith as per Act 30 of 2013 The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2024 3 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 direct the 1 st respondent to take stringent action against the respondents 2 to 4 herein for disobedience of the orders of this Honorable Court in WP No. 20409 of 2008 dated 18.09.2008 as well as in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2022 in the interest of justice pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA 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 may be pleased to grant Leave to the Petitioners/Respondents No. 2 & 3 to file the Counter Affidavit in W.P.No.24520 of 2024 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V SAI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V SURYA KIRAN KUMAR (SC FOR VMRDA and MUDA) 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 3. Somisetty Ganesh Babu SC For VUDA and MUDA 4. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 4 Order:- Petitioner is aggrieved by the in-action on part of the respondents in considering his representation dated 24.03.2022 seeking compensation for the land acquired. 2. It is submitted that the petitioner, prior to acquisition of the land, was the title holder for 871 sq. yards in Sy.No.40 and 40/1B of Gandhi Nagar, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner filed W.P.No.20409 of 2008, which was disposed on 18.09.2008 granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation seeking compensation for the land acquired and the respondents were directed to pass appropriate orders. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no orders are passed in pursuance of the orders of this Court. It is submitted that the petitioner was issued compensation for 0.03 cents of land. The 2nd respondent deposited the said amount in the Civil Court as there was some dispute pending at that point of time. It is submitted that subsequently the petitioner received compensation for 0.03 cents of land. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent had taken over the entire 0.18 cents of land and the petitioner’s land is now developed as green belt abetting the national Highway-5. 0.03 cents of land was utilized for widening road and 0.15 cents of land belonging to the petitioners was utilized for developing green belt. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation on 24.03.2022, which remains unresolved till date. 5 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 has filed a counter and it is submitted that the land was acquired in the year 1991 and the compensation was issued for the extent of land acquired in terms of the award passed on 31.08.1991. It is submitted that the petitioner had filed writ petition in the year 2008 raising the dispute for the first time after lapse of several years. It is also submitted that the petitioner would have to substantiate his claim over the 871 sq. yards for claiming any compensation. It is submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner would only rely on a copy of adangal and some documents and it has no description of the documents. That apart, the award was passed for the land acquired and as such the case of the petitioner cannot be considered any further. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioner is claiming that his entire extent of 871 sq. yards was acquired and 0.03 cents of land was utilized for road widening and 0.15 cents of land was developed as green belt by the 2nd respondent. The order passed by this Court dated 18.08.2008 granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation and respondents therein to pass necessary orders has not been complied by the respondent authorities. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted a revised representation on 24.03.2022, which is to be answered by the respondent authorities. 6 7. Considering the submissions, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2022, subject to the petitioner establishing his title over 0.18 cents of land and the 2nd respondent shall also consider the extent of land acquired as compared to the extent of land of the petitioner as referred to in the title documents. The petitioner shall have to submit all the relevant documents relating to title over the said property within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order to enable the 2nd respondent to pass a reasoned order. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent shall pass orders within a period of eight (08) weeks. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 03.12.2025 JLV