Pyda Venkamma W/O. Subbaiah Occ. House Wife, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Prl. Secretary,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI W.P.No.10782 of 2017 ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the following relief:

"To issue a Writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not referring the matter to civil court under Section 30 of the Old Act and Section 76 of the New Land Acquisition Act inspite of the petitioners representation dated 12.12.2016 in connection with the petitioner lands situated in Sy No. 81, to an extent of admeasuring Ac.4-29 Gts, and Sy. No.82 to an extent of admeasuring Ac. 4-31 Gts, Sy.No.91 to an extent of Ac.4-19 gts and Sy.No.93 to an extent of Ac.1-20 gis situated at Upperu Grampanchayat, Yerrapadu Village, Kukunuru Mandal. West Godavari District without showing the petitioner name in the Land Acquisition proceedings vide Notification RoC.No.E-126307/20161R&R dated 21.6.

2016 and trying to pay the compensation amounts in favour of the Un Official Respondent Nos. 6 to 8 in respect of the land in question is illegal and avoid and opposed to Article, 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to refer th matter to the civil court by depositing the entire compensation amount in respect of the land in question". 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for Respondents 1 to 5 and the learned counsel appearing for Respondents 6 to 8, apart from perusing the material available on record. 3.

In the present Writ Petition, the petitioner herein is disputing the right of respondents 6 to 8 in receiving compensation amount in respect of the subject properties. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, that award has not yet been passed in respect of the subject properties and it is open for the petitioner as well as Respondents 6 to 8 to raise their claims before the Authorities under Act 30 of 2013.

4.

Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Respondents 1 to 5 and the learned counsel for Respondents 6 to 8, this Court is of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be served if the petitioner as well as respondents 6 to 8 are permitted to raise their claims before the Respondent authorities with regard to their right over the property.

5.

For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of, keeping it open to the petitioner as well as respondents 6 to 8 to raise their respective claims before the 3rd respondent and it is open for the 3rd respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J Date: 24.3.2017 DA

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI W.P.No.10782 of 2017 24.3.2017 DA