1. Proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’), were initiated and land to an extent of Ac. 825.39 guntas, situated in Gollapalli Kalan Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, was acquired for establishing an International Airport at Shamshabad Mandal. Land to an extent of Ac. 4.00 owned by the petitioner, in Survey No.44/A/1 to an extent of Ac. 0.27 guntas and in Survey No.45 (Part) to an extent of Ac. 3.13 guntas, was also acquired. While determining the compensation, the lands which are under acquisition were categorized into ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’. For the lands which are categorized as ‘A’, compensation determined was Rs.4,00,000/- per acre. The land of the petitioner is also classified as Category ‘A’ land, but compensation determined was Rs.80,000/-. The petitioner disputed the compensation determined. The dispute was referred to civil Court under Section 18 of the Act and L.A.O.P.No.480 of 2003 was allowed by order, dated 11.08.2011, enhancing the compensation to Rs.4,00,000/-. Aggrieved by this, the State preferred appeal to this Court in L.A.A.S.No.404 of 2012. By judgment, dated 10.09.2013, the appeal was partly allowed. The compensation amount determined in L.A.O.P.No.480 of 2003 is upheld, but the order is modified with reference to the solatium and the petitioner is denied solatium. The State preferred Special Leave Petition to Supreme Court, but so far no orders are passed in the S.L.P.

2. The petitioner filed E.P.No.34 of 2013 alleging non-compliance of the order of enhancement of compensation. So far, E.P.No.34 of 2013 is not disposed of. Even though an order of attachment was passed on 07.08.2013, the compensation amount could not be recovered by the petitioner. In those compelling circumstances, this writ petition is instituted.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in an illegal and arbitrary manner, far less compensation was determined to the lands of the petitioner as compared to all other farmers whose lands are classified as ‘A’ category. He was paid only Rs.80,000/- and the difference of amount is yet to be paid. The land acquisition proceedings are concluded in the year 2003 and even after 11 years, the applicant is unable to enjoy the fruits of his success in the land acquisition proceedings and unable to receive the due compensation to which he is entitled on account of loss of huge extent of his land, as the value of which is at a very high price as compared to even the compensation determined in L.A.O.P.No.480 of 2003.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader raised objection about maintainability of the writ petition. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner has an effective remedy by way of execution proceedings and the petitioner having initiated execution proceedings, cannot simultaneously prosecute the writ remedy and, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. He has also submitted that the Government filed S.L.P. on 06.01.2014. The S.L.P. is assigned Diary No.800 of 2014 and since so far the S.L.P. is not decided, the payment of compensation at this stage would result in unnecessary and avoidable proceedings to recover the amounts in the event of the respondents succeeding before the Supreme Court.

5. Mere pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court, that too at the Diary number stage cannot be a bar for seeking enforcement of an award passed in favour of the petitioner, which award is affirmed with modifications by this Court. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation as determined in L.A.O.P.No.480 of 2003 as modified by this Court in L.A.A.S.No.404 of 2012 and non-payment of compensation as determined only on the ground that an appeal is filed and the same is pending is erroneous. This amounts to harassment and arbitrary and discriminatory exercise of power by the concerned authority. More so, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, for the same category of lands, th