APHC010425902015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3549] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA X-OBJECTION No:22 of 2025 in/and Land Acquisition Appeal No:292/2015; and X-OBJECTION No:23 of 2025 In/and Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No:331 of 2015; NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 2 Land Acquisition Appeal No:292/2015 Between: 1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION),, NEW B.G.RAILWAY LINE, NANDYAL. ...APPELLANT AND 1. GUNDAM VENKATA PRASADA REDDY, S/o. G. Bali Reddy Mittapalli Village, Banaganapalli Mandal, Kurnool District. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1. GP FOR APPEALS (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SAVITHRI DEVI 2. BALLA RAVINDRANATH SAVITHRI DEVI NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 3 The Court made the following Common Judgment: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) The present batch of appeals and the X-Objections have been preferred against the common order dated 15.04.2010 in O.P Nos.480 and 481 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal. 2. For the purpose of New Broad Gauge Railway Line from Nandyal to Yerraguntla, Kadapa District, a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (herein after referred to as “Act”) was issued on 26.08.2003. 3. The lands of the claimants/cross-objectors situated in Kapulapalli (which is adjacent to Mittapalli Village at a distance of 1 KM) were part of the said acquisition. The Land Acquisition Officer at the time of enquiry, categorized the lands into two (02) lands: 1) dry lands with rainfed and 2) dry lands irrigated under bore-wells and fixed the compensation @ Rs.30,000/- and Rs.35,000/- per acre respectively, vide award No.14/2003-05 dated 26.07.2005. 4. The claimants/cross-objectors while receiving the compensation under protest, sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as „Act‟) and to enhance the market value to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre. 5. Before the learned Reference Court, they examined RW1 one of the claimants and got marked Exs.B1 and B2. On behalf of the Referring Officer no oral evidence was adduced. The copy of the award No.14/2003-05 dated 26.07.2005 was marked with consent. 6. The learned Reference Court after considering the material on record, enhanced the compensation/fixed the market value for category No.1 lands @ Rs.80,000/- per acre and category No.2 lands @ Rs.85,000/- per acre and awarded statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the State preferred the present appeals. The claimants filed X-Objections in the appeals vide X- Objection Nos:22 and 23 of 2025 seeking enhancement of the compensation NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 4 @ Rs.5,00,000/- per acre, however, restricted their claim to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. 7. At the time of considering the matters, it is brought to the notice of this Court that in respect of the acquisition of lands for the purpose of the very same Railway Line from Nandyal to Yerraguntla, under award No.13/2005, some of the O.Ps i.e., L.A.O.P. Nos.501, 502, 503 of 2008 and L.A.O.P Nos:226 and 227 of 2011 were disposed of by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, by a common order dated 29.03.2014 fixing the market value of the acquired lands @ Rs.3,40,000/- per acre as against Rs.5,00,000/- claimed by the land owners. 8. The learned counsel for the claimants/cross-objectors submits that against the orders passed in O.P Nos:503 of 2008 and 226 of 2011, the State preferred appeals along with the applications to condone the delay and placed a copy of the orders passed in L.A.A.S M.P No:869 of 2016 in L.A.A.S (SR) No:8699 of 2016 and L.A.A.S.M.P No:680 of 2016 in L.A.A.S (SR) No.8585 of 2016 for perusal of the Court. A Division Bench of the erstwhile Common High Court for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh was not inclined to condone the delay of 703 days in L.A.A.S (SR) No:8699 of 2016 and dismissed the same. So far as the other appeals preferred by the State against the orders passed in O.P Nos:502 of 2008 and 227 of 2011 vide L.A.A.S (SR) Nos:7842 and 7859 of 2015, the very same Bench rejected the appeals for non-service of notice on the respondents/claimants and dismissed the said appeals at the SR stage. 9. The learned counsel also submits that, in so far as, remaining appeals which are filed against the O.P Nos.503 of 2008 and 226 of 2011 vide L.A.A.S No.17 and 25 of 2017, were dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 10.07.2025 NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 5 10. The learned counsel submits that in view of the dismissal of the appeals which are filed by the State against the order of the learned Reference Court, in respect of the lands which are acquired for the purpose of acquisition of the lands for the same project, the same village, the Cross-Objections deserves to be allowed, while the appeals of the State are liable to be dismissed. 11. The learned Government Pleader for appeals had not disputed about the orders passed by this Court on the earlier occasions with reference to which the learned counsel for the claimants/Cross-Objectors made submissions. 12. We have perused the material on record including the orders dated 10.07.2025 in L.A.A.S Nos:17 and 25 of 2017, wherein the factum of dismissal of the appeals filed by the State with reference to the fixation of market value by the learned Reference Court in respect of the said award were set out in detail. 13. The said orders passed by the Division Bench of the erstwhile Common High Court for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh appears to have attained finality as nothing contrary is brought to the notice of this Court. In the present case, the award was passed on the very same day i.e., 26.07.2005 as in the case of adjacent village which is 1 Km from the subject matter lands of acquisition. 14. In the said circumstances, to maintain parity and also in the light of the decision in 2017 (9) SCC 426, wherein the Hon‟ble Apex Court inter alia held that “in order to ensure that the land owners are given proper compensation, the Act provides for „fair compensation‟. Once such a fair compensation is determined judicially, all lands owners whose land was taken away by the same Notification should become the beneficiary thereof. Not only it is an aspect of good governance, failing to do would also amount to discrimination by giving different treatment to the persons though identically situated”, the NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 6 Cross-objections restricting the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- are allowed and the appeals of the State are dismissed. 15. It is, however ordered that the claimants/cross-objectors are not entitled to interest for the period of delay in approaching this Court/preferring the Cross Objections. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA ____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date:25.09.2025 Ksj NJS,J & GTK,J L.A.A.S Nos:292 & 331 of 2015 7 659 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Land Acquisition Appeal Nos:292 and 331 of 2015 25th September, 2025 Ksj