Back
2014 Supreme(AP) 1492
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Akula Venkata Sesha Sai, J.
K. Bhaskar and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
The Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. - Respondents
W.P. Nos. 15825 and 15826 of 2008
Decided On: 16.12.2014
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants: M.S. Prasad, Sr. Counsel and V. Vinod K. Reddy
For the Respondents: G.P.
Headnote:
Civil Law – Joint Collector rejected the payment of ex gratia to the Petitioners – Challenged – Non-payment of ex gratia – alleging violation of conditions of assignment and ineligibility. Ultimately, the validity and the legal sustainability of the said action is under challenge in these Writ Petitions – Petitioners were assigned various extents of lands, by the authorities, in years 1983 & 1985 and petitioners were issued Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds. On the requisition of A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) in year 2006, State Government took possession of said assigned lands and alienated to APIIC and in turn APIIC alienated to Sri City (SEZ) by way of a Sale Deed – Complaining non-payment of ex gratia – Held, Absence of any orders of cancellation of pattas and since the pattas granted in the years 1983 and 1985 are still intact, in the considered opinion of this Court, the respondents are not justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioners. It is also noteworthy that no provision of law is pointed out which authorises and empowers the Joint Collector to resort to impugned action and in the absence of any legal and statutory sanction and foundation, the order impugned is liable to be declared as one without jurisdiction – Coming to aspect of payment of amounts to the petitioners, it is significant to note that in view of the Larger Bench Judgment of this Court in Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Domalguda, Hyderabad v. Mekala Pandu, 2004 (2) ALD 451, petitioners are now entitled for compensation on par with private properties as per new legislation i.e. Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, -Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – It is also significant to note in this connection that Honble Apex Court vide order in Civil Appeal dismissed the appeals filed against the above referred judgment and confirmed view taken by the Larger Bench of this Court in above referred judgment – Petitions allowed. (Paras 10, 11 and 12)
Akula Venkata Sesha Sai, J.
1. In both these Writ Petitions, challenge is to the Order of the Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Chittoor passed vide proceedings D. Dis. No. E4/864/2011 dated 15.3.2011. By way of the said Order, the Joint Collector rejected the payment of ex gratia to the Petitioners.
2. Heard Sri M.S. Prasad, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri Vinod K. Reddy, counsel on record for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for the Respondents, apart from perusing the material available before the Court.
3. Petitioners were assigned various extents of lands, by the authorities, situated at Cherivi Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District in the years 1983 & 1985 and the petitioners herein were issued Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds. On the requisition of A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) in the year 2006, State Government took possession of the said assigned lands and alienated to APIIC and in turn APIIC alienated to Sri City (SEZ) by way of a Sale Deed dated 17.3.2008. Complaining non-payment of ex gratia , the present Writ Petitions came to be filed and this Court initially on 23.7.2008 disposed of these Writ Petitions, leaving it open to the respondents to take further steps for acquisition of the lands in question after payment of ex gratia to the petitioners as provided under G.O.Ms. No. 1307 dated 23.12.1993 subject to the subsistence of the DKT Pattas granted in favour of the petitioners. Subsequently in Review Petition Nos. 17719 & 37106 of 2011 dated 24.1.2013, the said orders were reviewed and this Court restored the Writ Petitions to file. Thus, these Writ Petitions.
4. The Mandal Revenue Officer-4th respondent vide Notice R.O.C. No. B/418/05 dated 16.9.2009 informed the petitioners about taking possession of the land for industrial purpose for APIIC and asked the petitioners to show cause. Subsequently vide proceedings ROC.B/418/2005 dated 30.9.2009, the Tahsildar, Satyavedu passed orders of resumption and informed about the quantum of ex gratia amount also. The material available on record further shows that the Tahsildar vide Letter Roc.B/418/2005 dated 14.10.2009 addressed to the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (SEZ), Unit-III, Tirupathi recommended for payment of ex gratia to the petitioners in terms of the earlier orders dated 23.7.2008. Thereafter, vide Roc.B/182/09 dated 19.12.2009 the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (SEZ) Unit-III, Tirupathi sent a report to the District Collector, Chittoor. The District Collector vide proceedings D. Dis. G2/13556/09 dated 1.2.2010 asked the Special Deputy Collector to take action for payment of ex gratia and the Tahsildar by virtue of letters Roc.B/333/07 dated 18.9.2010 and 30.9.2010 requested the District Collector, Chittoor to sanction the ex gratia amounts. The Revenue Divisional Officer vide letters dated 18.9.2010 and 30.9.2010 made similar requests to the District Collector.
5. It is appropriate to mention at this juncture that in the month of September, 2010, the petitioners filed C.C. Nos. 1318 & 1355 of 2010. Thereafter, the respondents filed Review Petitions vide W.P.M.P. Nos. 17719 & 37106 of 2011 in the month of May, 2011 and the same were allowed and Contempt Cases were dismissed consequently. The record further shows that vide Notice Roc. E4/864/2011 dated 27.1.2011, the Joint Collector, Chittoor asked the petitioners to show cause as to how the petitioners are entitled for ex gratia. In response to the same, the petitioners, through their counsel, sent a reply dated 2.2.2011. Thereafter, on 15.3.2011, the Joint Collector passed the impugned order vide D. Dis. E4/864/2011 dated 15.3.2011, rejecting the payment of ex gratia to the petitioners, alleging violation of conditions of assignment and ineligibility. Ultimately, the validity and the legal sustainability of the said action is under challenge in these Writ Petitions.
6. It is contended by the lear
