IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMAR (Special Original Jurisdiction) IIct MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY\\9-,'^I TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE " /i 'O' 4 ^ \%- J'-'l 7 O. r/., .0 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI " WRIT PETITION NOS: 4064 AND 4208 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NO: 4064 OF 2022 Between: Gudala Surekha @ Thukivakam Surekha, W/o. G. Ramesh, age 33 years, R/o. D.No. 3-118, Harijanawada, Merlapaka village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented through its Principal Secretary Revenue Department (Land Acquisition), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati Revenue Division, Tirupati, Chittoor District. The Tahsildar, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. 1. 2. 3. 4. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents may more specifically with the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned proceedings dt. 17-12-2020 issued by the 2nd respondent to the extent of categorization of lands and fixing the cost of acquisition for petitioner's land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 176/9 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District unilaterally and trying to take possession of the petitioner's land without paying compensation and other benefits as provided under the Act, 2013 as illegal, high handed and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India apart from violation of provisions under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Rules made there under and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from his land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 176/9 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 to direct the respondents and their henchmen not to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 176/9 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District till the cost of acquisition is paid as provided under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. PASALA PONNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO: 4208 OF 2022 Between: f Aruri Polamma, W/o. Late Battaiah, age 70 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. D.No. 3-80, Harijanawada, Merlapaka village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented through its Principal Secretary Revenue Department (Land Acquisition), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati Revenue Division, Tirupati Chittoor District. 3. 4. The Tahsildar, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Respondents 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 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 specifically with the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the impugned proceedings dt. 17-12-2020 issued by the 2nd respondent to the extent of categorization of lands and fixing the cost of acquisition for petitioner's land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 174/3 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District unilaterally and trying to take possession of the petitioner's land without paying compensation and other benefits as provided under the Act, 2013 as illegal, high handed and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India apart from violation of provisions under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Rules r made there under and dispossess the petitioner from his land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents No. 174/3 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal lA NO: 1 OF 2077 consequently direct the respondents not to in Sy. Chittoor District. Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents and their henchmen not to interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of land admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents in Sy. No. 174/3 in Pagali revenue village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District till the cost of acquisition is paid as provided under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the Rules praying that in the circumstances made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. PASALA PONNA Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR LAND Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following common order: RAO ACQUISITION T APHC010064812022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4064/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER Gudala Surekha/thukivakam Surekha AND ...RESPONDENT(S) State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PASALA PONNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 2.GP FOR REVENUE WRIT PETITION NO: 4208/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER Aruri Polamma AND ...RESPONDENT(S) State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAS ALA PONNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): ■“7' 2 1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION 2.GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Impugning the proceedings of the 2"'^ respondent dated 17.12.2020 unilaterally categorizing the lands of the petitioners admeasuring Ac.1.50 cents in Sy.No.174/3 & Ac.1.50 cents in Sy.No.176/9 of Pagali Village, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District, as category A & B and trying to take possession without paying compensation and other benefits under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the present writ petitions are filed. As the reliefs sought in these writ petitions are similar in nature, these writ petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. Heard Sri Pasala Ponna Rao, learned counsel for the writ petitioners 2. and Sri Kata Samba Siva Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the writ affidavits submitted that the subject lands have been assigned to the petitioners in the year 2006 and the revenue authorities have issued D-form pattas and incorporated their names in the revenue records. While so, the subject lands have been acquired for the purpose of providing house sites under the Government Scheme called ‘Navaratnalu Pedalandariki lllu’ wherein the respondents categorized the lands as categoryA & B. The 3 r difference between these categories is that the person/individua l having D-form patta in his/her favour and his/her name found in the revenue records under category A and the other persons as category B and fixed comes compensation to an amount of Rs. 15,50,000/- to category A and Rs.7,74,500/- to category B. In those circumstances, the petitioners along with other similarly situated persons made a representation dated 10.01.2022 through Spandana raising several objections requesting the authorities to pay compensation to an tune of Rs.25,00,000/- per acre. On 25.01.2022, the petitioners received a message from Spandana web informing that the problem is solved but no action has been initiated till date on the said representation. He further submitted that the respondents have not dealt with the grievance of the petitioners in right perspective and without paying compensation legally entitled to, are now trying to interfere with their property. The amount fixed is also very meagre. If the said action is materialized, it would affect the rights of the petitioners, as such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioners. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader in elaboration to what has been stated in the counter of the Tahsildar, Yerpedu Mandal, submitted that the writ petitioners have not produced any D-form pattas for the subject lands. Moreover the lands under acquisition have already been taken possession duly fixing compensation and by negotiation. In view of non 4. 4 submission of relevant documents i.e., D-form pattas, the compensation has been fixed under category B. He further contended that, the negotiations have been conducted with the land losers and with the consent of the farmers compensation has been fixed for an amount of Rs.15,50,000/- as lumpsum excluding the values of structures and trees existing therein accordingly the petitioners lands have been taken into category B by virtue of G.O.Ms.571 dated 14.09.2012. The petitioner has not raised any valid and justifiable grounds warranting the interference of this Court. There is no illegality or procedural impropriety in passing the impugned proceedings. The writ petitions are misconceived deserves dismissal, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petitions. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. It is not in dispute that certain lands have been acquired for the purpose of granting house sites under the Government scheme called ‘Navaratnalu- Pedalandariki lllu’ in which the subject lands were also included. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent authorities while fixing compensation has not followed proper procedure and the amount fixed for compensation is very meagre and in fact the value of the land in that particular area is around Rs.25,00,000/- per acre. No opportunity was provided to the petitioners at the time of negotiations. Further, though D-form pattas have been issued in their favour and their names have been incorporated in the revenue records, they were categorized under category B. 5 A perusal of the impugned proceedings would indicate that the lands were resumed to Government on payment of ex gratia for issuance of house 7. sites under the scheme Navaratnalu Pedalandariki lllu. The Revenue Divisional Officer, has reported that the market value has been approved taking into consideration of the basic value of the lands in Pagali Village as Rs.5,00,000/-. But the land losers demanded Rs.25,00,000/- per acre and finally in the negotiations, they have extended their consent for an amount of Rs. 15,50,000/- per acre as lumpsum excluding the values and structures existing in the land. The record would indicate that while fixing compensation, the lands also categorized as A & B differentiating the individuals having D-form pattas in their favour as category A and the others as category B. There is no doubt that negotiations have been taken place but there is no material placed on record to show that as to whether the respondent authorities have heard the individuals independently or not. The record would further indicate that the D-form pattas have been issued in favour of the petitioners and their names were also found place in the adangal and pattadar passbooks were also issued. However, basing on the material available on record, this Court cannot come to a conclusion that the petitioner has submitted all their documents before the concerned authority for claiming compensation. In these circumstances, it would be ^ appropriate to give an opportunity to the petitioners to approach the authority concerned and claim a compensation by placing all the relevant records in 8. were 9. 6 support of their claim so that the authority concerned will take a decision in that regard. If really the petitioners falls under category ‘A’, they will be losing compensation legally entitled to by then if they were paid compensation under category ‘B’. Hence, this Court is inclined to give them an opportunity to place documents. Basing on the material placed by the petitioner, if they came under category ‘A’, the authority has to act accordingly. Taking the facts and circumstances and the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties into consideration, this Court is inclined to dispose of 10. the writ petition by passing the following order;- “The petitioners are at liberty to make a representation to the concerned authority for payment of compensation to their lands by raising all the grounds that has been raised before this Court and by submitting all the relevant documents in support of their claim within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such submission, the authority concerned shall consider and dispose of the said representation for payment of compensation in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible within a period of three (03) months thereafter. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order 11. as to costs. 7 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-B.PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Land Acquisition), State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati Revenue Division Chittoor District. 4. The Tahsildar, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. 5. One CC to Sri. Pasala Ponna Rao Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Land Acquisition, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CCs to GPfor Revenue, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. 8. Three CD Copies Tirupati [OUT] GSC ■ HIGH COURT DATED:03/02/2025 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos. 4064 and 4208 of 2022 * OV APR 2025 ^ . Current deciion . ^ disposing of the WPS WITHOUT COSTS