S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) WHETHER the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the constitution of India can issue a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to make payment in relation to the amount enhanced by the civil court in a reference made under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act, 1894 ( the Act for brevity) is the question which has been referred by a learned Judge of this Court noticing various decisions of the Division Bench of this Court and an unreported judgment in Writ petition No. 12763 of 1999 holding that such writ petitions are maintainable. A learned single Judge in Sur Reddy and others v. Special deputy Collector (LA) Medak held that existence of remedy by way of execution petition before a civil court is not a bar and the writ petition is maintainable. The referring Judge was of the opinion that a question would arise as to whether by reason of non-payment of such enhanced compensation the right of the awardees under Article 300-A of the Constitution has been taken away.

( 2 ) ALL these writ petitions have been filed by the awardees in whose favour judgments have been passed by the civil court on a reference ma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document