APHC010198382018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 8796/2018 Between: 1. MOHD. SHOUKAT ALI, S/O LATE MOHD. ALI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GOSALA CENTRE, BANDAR ROAD, EDUPUGALLU VILLAGE, KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P. STATE. ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION IOF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROADS (TRANSPORTS), HIGH WAYS (MORTH), NEW DELHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGH WAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 4. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, CUM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DIST. (N.H.NO.65, VIJAYAWADA TO MACHILIPATNAM) 5. THE TAHSILDAR, KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. ...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 2 pleased toto issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to demolish the R.C.C. Building shop premises (two Floors i.e. G plus1) of the petitioner situated in D.No.4-28/4, Assessment No.3784 in an extent of 18.71 square yards in R.S.No.369/3, abutting N.H.No.65, Edupugallu Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District for the purpose of expansion/widening of National High Way (N.H.No.65) from Vijayawada to Machilipatnam without issuing any notice or acquiring the land and without paying compensation and without following any due process of law as arbitrary and illegal, violative of Article 14, 21, 300-A of the constitution of India and principles of Natural Justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 direct the respondents not to demolish the R.C.C. Building shop premises (two Floors i.e. G plus 1) of the petitioner situated in D.No.4-28/4, Assessment No.3784 in an extent of 18.71 square yards in R.S.No.369/3, abutting N.H.No.65, Edupugallu Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District for the purpose of expansion/widening of National High Way (N.H.No.65) from Vijayawada to Machilipatnam pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S JANARDHAN GOUD (SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT COU) 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3. S S VARMA (SC FOR NHAI) 3 The Court made the following ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare action of the respondents in attempting to demolish the subject land premises (shops) for the purpose of expansion/widening of National High Way No.65 from Vijayawada to Machilipatnam without issuing any notice or acquiring the land and paying compensation as illegal, arbitrary etc. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner while making submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of Writ Petition, however, has brought to the notice of the Court the averments made in page No.3 of the counter affidavit of respondent No.4, which reads as under: As the name of the petitioner is included in the award, the representation was forwarded to the Tahsildar, Kankipadu for enquiry and report. The Tahsildar, Kankipadu has inturn enquired into the matter, and submitted report vide Rc. A/48/2018/ File No.TAHKPD-LAND0LANH (ENQ)/1/2018-DT(DT)- TAH-(KKP)-VJADVN, dated 21.03.2018, stating that the applicant Mohd. Shoukat Ali has purchased an extent of 15.64 square meters in R.S.No.369/3, from Smt Shaik Shammemun, W/o.Shaik Mani vide registered sale deed No.4663/2004, dated 22.11.2004, and there exists an RCC building, bearing Door No.4-28/4. The R & B authorities have estimated the structure value of Rs.1,31,386/-. The same were acquired for National Highway-9. The Tahsildar, further reported that out of 33.44 square meters of land, awarded to Shaik Shameemun, an extent of 15.64 square meters, belongs to Mohd. Shoukat Ali and that the total compensation was mistakenly released in favour of Shaik Shameemun. 4 Immediately steps are being taken for recovery of excess compensation, mistakenly released to Shaik Shameemun and the Tahsildar, Kankipadu was directed to issue notices under Revenue Recovery Act and recover the excess compensation released to Shaik Shameemun, so as to release the same to the rightful landholder Mohd. Shoukat Ali. He further submits that though the said counter affidavit was filed as long back on 06.04.2018, the respondent authorities have not taken any further action for recovery of the amounts from the said Shaik Shameemun, who is the vendor of the petitioner, nor paid the compensation to which the petitioner is entitled to. He further submits that though the name of petitioner was included in the award, the compensation is not awarded and seeks appropriate directions. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.K.Arjun Chowdary made submissions with reference to the latest instructions dated 18.11.2025 received from respondent No.4. He submits that in fact, with a view to resolve the issue of payment of compensation, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada, on receipt of legal notice got issued on behalf of Writ Petitioner, called upon the petitioner to attend the office of the Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada with all relevant documentary evidence in proof of title over the land. He submits that thereafter, no further action is initiated, as it appears that the petitioner has not responded to the notice dated 21.03.2018 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Be that as it may. He submits that if the petitioner approaches the 4th respondent, the compensation would be paid, subject to the production of the relevant documentary evidence establishing the title of 5 the petitioner over the subject matter property. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the relevant portion of the latest instructions dated 18.11.2025. 4. In the light of the submissions and instructions dated 18.11.2025, which are placed on record, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the 4th respondent and submit the relevant documentary evidence and other details for the purpose of verification of the petitioner’s title in respect of the subject matter property and payment of compensation. If the petitioner approaches the 4th respondent, expeditious action shall be taken by the 4th respondent without any further delay as the acquisition was of the year 2013. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Dt: 30.12.2025 SJ 6 121 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 8796 of 2018 Dated: 30.12.2025 SJ