Thumu Srikanth, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Its Principal Secretary,

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1045 of 2014 DATE: 18.02.2015 Between:

Thumu Srikanth, Hyderabad and another ... Appellants And State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and two others.

... Respondents This Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1045 of 2014 Judgment: (per the Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This matter has been sent back by the Lok Adalat organized by the High Court Legal Services Committee, which took up the matter for settlement. However, from the endorsement of the Lok Adalat, we notice that the matter could not be settled in spite of notice being issued, as none of the parties appeared. Now the matter is taken up for hearing. We notice the learned trial Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition giving liberty to the parties to take steps in accordance with law. Sri P.

Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the third respondent has played tricks not only upon this Court but also upon the Lok Adalat. As reported to this Court, through the learned counsel, the respondents agreed for settlement in the Lok Adalat. Ultimately, they did not appear before the Lok Adalat and taking note of the pendency of this matter, without any interim order being passed, the third respondent has withdrawn the amount of compensation. The dispute involved, as found by the learned trial Judge, relates apportionment of compensation amount released by the State on account of acquisition of the land.

the writ petition giving liberty to the parties to approach appropriate forum.

The said order having been found to be correct, we do not find any merit in this appeal. It would be open for the appellants to take steps in accordance with law not only for the relief claimed in the writ petition, but also in relation to the subsequent event, which has taken place because of the withdrawal of the compensation by the third respondent.

The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 18.02.2015 va