APHC010248922018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 10972/2018 Between: 1. ELURI SAROJANAMMA, W/O ELURI RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 70 YRS. R/O SREEDHARAVELERU VILLAGE, KUKUNOOR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.. 2. RAVULAPATI MADHAVI, W/O SARATH, AGED ABOUT 400 YRS. R/O SREEDHARAVELERU VILLAGE, KUKUNOOR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT (POLAVARAM PROJECT), GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND SUB COLLECTOR, KUKUNOOR, WEST GODAVRI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, POLAVARAM PROJECT, KUKUNOOR, WEST GODAVRI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 pleased to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents herein not to give effect to the same and 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 pleased to stay the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 to implead the petitioner as Respondent No. 4 in W.P.No. 10972 of 2018 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 Permit the petitioners to file Additional affidavit in the WP No.10972 of 2018 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 3 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 1. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP) 2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP) The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents herein not to give effect to the same and pass…” 2. The petitioners’ lands admeasuring Acs.6.37 cents situated in S.No.37 of Sridharaveleu village, Kukunoor mandal, West Godavari district were acquired by the Government due to submergence under Polavaram Irrigation Project. While the respondent authorities were initiating steps to award compensation to the petitioners, one Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.39038 of 2016 before this Court questioning the award proceedings; the said writ petition was disposed of on 14.03.2017 directing the petitioners and the said Dasari Jogaiah to raise all objections before the 2nd respondent. However, as the said Dasari Jogaiah did not raise any objection before the 2nd respondent, after conducting due 5 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 enquiry and after considering the evidence on record, the 2nd respondent passed an award vide Roc.No.A/82/2016, dated 24.03.2017 in respect of the petitioners’ lands and thereafter, the 2nd respondent has also deposited the compensation amount into the petitioners’ individual bank accounts. 3. Thereafter, the said Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.12119 of 2017 before this Court questioning the award dated 24.03.2017, which was disposed of along with W.P.No.12154 and 12169 of 2017 by way of a common order dated 01.08.2017, wherein, this Court observed as under: “…However, it came to light that though this Court granted an order of status quo, in W.P.No.12169 of 2017 the amount was already disbursed, whereas in other two writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.12119 and 12154 of 2017 the amount was not disbursed. If that is so, liberty is given to the petitioners to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of the petitioners and the respondents 6 and 7 inter se and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law determining the right to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government. It is needless to observe that the respondents 2 and 3 shall send the record to the competent authority for determination and the competent authority shall dispose of the claims in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, giving due opportunity to the parties. Till the determination of the claims by the competent 6 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 authority, there shall be status quo with regard to disbursement of the amount covered by the awards…” 4. The case of the petitioners is that by the time this Court has passed the said common order i.e., on 01.08.2017, compensation amounts were already disbursed to the petitioners account in the month of March, 2017. While the matter stood thus, the 2nd respondent, issued a notice on 17.02.2018 directing the petitioners to repay the compensation amount received by them as if it is directed by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Immediately, the petitioners submitted an explanation on 26.02.2018 stating that this Court has never directed the respondent authorities to recover the compensation paid to the petitioners pursuant to the award dated 24.03.2017 and as such, requested to withdraw the said notice. In spite of submitting an explanation to the show cause notice dated 17.02.2018, the 2nd respondent has issued the impugned notice dated 21.03.2018 on the same grounds, aggrieved by which, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 5. When the writ petition came up for admission on 03.04.2018, this Court granted stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notices issued by the 2nd respondent on 17.02.2018 and also the notice bearing No.A/98/2016, dated 21.03.2018 pending disposal of the writ petition. 7 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 6. The 4th respondent, who is the son of late Dasari Jogaiah filed a counter affidavit duly admitting the facts as stated by the petitioner and strenuously contended that the 2nd respondent has issued the impugned notices by scrupulously following the direction issued by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Heard Sri. P. Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri. D. Srinivas, learned counsel for the 4th respondent. 8. Perused the entire material available on record. It can be seen that the subject lands, allegedly belonging to the petitioners, were acquired by the 2nd respondent for the purpose of developing Polavaram Irrigation Project and while the respondent authorities were initiating steps to pay compensation to the petitioners herein, one Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.39038 of 2016 before this Court questioning the said action of the respondent authorities, wherein this Court passed a final order on 14.03.2017, directing the petitioners herein as well as the said Dasari Jogaiah to raise objections before the 2nd respondent herein. Pursuant to the said order, as the said Dasari Jogaiah failed to raise any objection, the 2nd respondent, considering the documents submitted by the petitioners, 8 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 passed an award vide Roc.No.A/82/2016, dated 24.03.2017 holding that the petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.71,94,426/-. 9. Subsequently, in the month of April, 2017, the said Dasari Jogaiah approached this Court by filing W.P.No.12119 of 2017 seeking a direction to the respondent authorities not to release the compensation amount in favour of the petitioners herein or any third parties. The said writ petition was heard by this Court along with W.P.Nos.12154 and 12169 of 2017 and a common order was passed on 01.08.2017, granting liberty to the petitioners therein to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of all the parties therein and the competent authority was directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, determining the right to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government. Furthermore, the Court granted status quo with regard to disbursement of the amount covered by the awards, till determination of claims by the competent authority. It is to be noted that in the said common order, this Court has specifically observed that in W.P.No.12169 of 2017, the amounts were disbursed to the concerned, but whereas in two other writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.12154 and 12119 of 2017, the amounts were not disbursed. 9 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 10. The present impugned notices were issued to the petitioners on 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018, with a direction to repay the amount of Rs.71,94,426/- received by them as compensation, to the Sub-Collector, Kukunoor by demand draft. It is the case of the petitioners that by the time the common order dated 01.08.2017 was passed by this Court granting status quo with regard to disbursement of amounts covered under the respective awards, the amount of Rs.71,94,426/- was already credited in the petitioners’ bank account. In support of the same, the petitioners filed an additional affidavit enclosing the transaction statement of the petitioners’ bank account bearing No.52167679154 of State Bank of India, Burgampahad, Khammam district. A perusal of the same would go to show that Rs.71,94,426/- was credited to the petitioners’ bank account on 04.05.2017, which is admittedly before passing of the common order dated 01.08.2017. 11. In such a case, when this Court has specifically directed the Dasari Jogaiah and others to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of the parties and further directed the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law determining the right of the parties to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government, the 2nd respondent, in the absence of any order from the 10 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 competent authority determining the right of the parties to receive compensation, ought not to have issued the impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018 directing the petitioners to repay the amount credited in their bank account on 04.05.2017. Moreover, the entire record is silent as to whether the 4th respondent has approached the competent authority and whether the competent authority has determined the right of either of the parties to receive compensation for the acquisition of the lands in question, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Merely because this Court has granted status quo with regard to disbursement of the amounts covered by the award till determination of the claims by the competent authority, the 2nd respondent cannot issue the impugned notices without any basis. It is pertinent to observe that amounts were already credited in the petitioners’ account on 04.05.2017, but, whereas, a common order was passed by this Court on 01.08.2017, which is subsequent to disbursement of the amounts. In such a case, until the rights of the 4th respondent are determined by the competent authority, the respondents cannot direct the petitioners to repay the compensation amount already credited to their bank account. 12. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this writ petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and 11 VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018 the notice bearing No.A/98/2016, dated 21.03.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent are hereby set-aside. 13. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 15.07.2026 Gss