APHC010217502015 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:7752 of 2017 in/and Land Acquisition Appeal No:307/2015; X-OBJECTION No:7754 of 2017 In/and Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No:311 of 2015; X-OBJECTION No:7766 of 2017 In/and Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No:312 of 2015; X-OBJECTION No:7756 of 2017 In/and Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No:327 of 2015; and X-OBJECTION No:7772 of 2017 In/and Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No:341 of 2015 NJS,J & GTK,J LAAS Nos:307, 311, 312, 327 & 341 of 2015 2 Land Acquisition Appeal No:307/2015; Between: 1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LAND ACQUISITION),, NEW B.G. RAILWAY LINE , NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. G VIJAYA NAGESWARA REDDY, S/o G.Chinna Narasi Reddy, Mittapalli Village, Banaganapalle Mandal, Kurnool District. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Respondent: 1. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SAVITHRI DEVI 2. HARIJA AKKINENI NJS,J & GTK,J LAAS Nos:307, 311, 312, 327 & 341 of 2015 3 This 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 04.01.2014 in O.P Nos.1167, 1168, 1169, 1170 and 1171 of 2007 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 10.08.2006. 3. The lands of the claimants/cross-objectors situated in Mittappli, Banaganapalle Mandal were part of the said acquisition. The Land Acquisition Officer at the time of enquiry, categorized the lands into two (02) categories: 1) dry lands and 2) wet lands fixed the compensation @ Rs.30,000/- and Rs.36,000/- per acre respectively, vide award No.1/2007 dated 04.01.2007. 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‟) to enhance the market value to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre. 5. Before the learned Reference Court, they examined RW No.1 (one of the claimants) to RW No.5 and got marked Exs.B1 to B6 and Exs.C1 and C2. On behalf of the Referring Officer, no witnesses were examined, but Exs.A1 to A3 were marked with consent. NJS,J & GTK,J LAAS Nos:307, 311, 312, 327 & 341 of 2015 4 6. The learned Reference Court after considering the material on record, enhanced the compensation/fixed the market value at Rs.2,50,000/- per acre commonly without taking the land category wise. Aggrieved by the same, the State preferred the present appeals. The claimants filed X-Objections in the appeals vide X-Objection Nos:7752, 7754, 7766, 7756 and 7772 of 2017 seeking enhancement of the compensation @ Rs.5,00,000/- per acre, however, restricted their claim to Rs.3,40,000/- 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 the very same 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 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 NJS,J & GTK,J LAAS Nos:307, 311, 312, 327 & 341 of 2015 5 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 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, fixing the compensation @ Rs.3,40,000/- per acre in respect of the lands which are acquired for the purpose of acquisition of the lands for the same project and the same village, the X-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 NJS,J & GTK,J LAAS Nos:307, 311, 312, 327 & 341 of 2015 6 by the learned Reference Court in respect of the very same project 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. 14. In the said circumstances, to maintain parity and also in the light of the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court 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 Cross-objections are allowed and the appeals filed by 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