Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(AP) 614

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J.
Ramineni Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Basavaiah & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Ministry of Roads Transport and Highways Transport & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.19864 of 2021
Decided On : 12-11-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : AMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM
For the Respondent: N HARINATHSC FOR DIR ENFORCEMENT

Point of Law - Section 3-H (4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated.

Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 – Article 226 - National Highways of India Act - Section 3G (11a) and Section 3 H(4) – Land – Dispute - Petitioner purchased land under a registered document from one and his sons - Petitioner also purchased land under a registered document bearing No.4472 of 2002, dated 24.12.2002 from Karri Naga Chalapathi Rao, S/o. Venku Naidu and another - Petitioner further purchased land under registered document – Since date of purchase, the petitioners is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of said land and there is no dispute with regard to purchase - Whether deposit of compensation into the Court under Section 3H (4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 is in accordance with law.
Findings of the Court :
Endorsement was issued by respondent and this Court cannot issue a writ of Mandamus declaring said endorsement as illegal and arbitrary and set aside the same since it is a disputed question of fact as there is dispute with regard to existence of land on ground and on paper - Respondent are expected to act fairly in determining compensation payable to land owners and payment of same to awardees - Instead of acting fairly, respondents appears to have acted as if they are private individual to defeat the rights of the petitioners - This Court though not competent to enquire into such disputed question of fact, court deem it appropriate to direct Tahsildar, respondent to re-examine the issue by taking measurements on ground in the presence of petitioners and respondent or its subordinate officials, determine actual extent acquired by respondent on ground with the help of Surveyor.
Result : Writ petition is allowed

ORDER:

This petitioners filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring

a. The proceedings in Rc.No.27/2021/SSRI, dated .07.2021 of the 4th respondent as arbitrary, illegal, not bonafide and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner in relation to an extent of 4030 Sq. Mts., land in Sy.No.15/1A correlated to 15/1C, Sy.No.15/6A correlated to 15/6, 15/7B correlated to 15/7 and 15/8B correlated 15/8 of Gavarapalem Ward, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District by adding the value of the structure and gravel as fixed by AEE (R & B). b. The endorsement L.PR.No.181/2021/SA, dated 12.07.2021 issued by the 6th respondent as arbitrary, not bonafide, illegal and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners based on the endorsement L.PR.No.181/2021/SA, dated 09.04.2021 by adding the value of the structure and gravel as fixed by AEE (R & B) by modifying Award No.46 of 2018, dated 05.11.2018 to suspend proceedings of Rc.No.27/2021/SSRI, dated .07.2021 of the 4th respondent pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and stay the dispossession of the petitioner pursuant to RC.No.27/2021/SSRI, dated 07.2021 of the 4th respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

To appoint an Advocate Commissioner to measure the extent of land under acquisition in all sub-divisions of Sy.No.15 on the Western side of National Highway of Gavarapalem Ward, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District with the assistance of Assistance Director Survey and Settlement, Collectorate Office, Visakhapatnam and file report with plan pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass”

2. The case of the petitioners in brief is that, the 1st petitioner purchased an extent of 23 cents equivalent to 1113.2 Sq. Yds., or 930.77 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.5/7 and 2 cents equivalent to 96.8 Sq. Yds., or 80.94 Sq. Mts., under a registered document bearing No.4471 of 2002, dated 24.12.2002 from Karri Suryanarayana, S/o. Appala Naidu and his sons. The 1st petitioner also purchased 15 cents equivalent to 726 Sq. Yds., or 607.03 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.15/8 under a registered document bearing No.4472 of 2002, dated 24.12.2002 from Karri Naga Chalapathi Rao, S/o. Venku Naidu and another. The 1st petitioner further purchased 31 cents equivalent to 1500.4 Sq. Yds., or 1254.53 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.15/6 and 2 cents equivalent 96.8 cents and 80.94 Sq. Mts., under registered document bearing No.2048 of 2003, dated 07.06.2003 from Karri Simhachalam, S/o. Venku Naidu and his sons. The 1st petitioner further purchased 33 cents equivalent to 1597.2 Sq. Yds., or 1335.46 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.15/2 and 2 cents equivalent to 96.8 Sq. Yds., or 80.94 Sq. Mts., under a registered document bearing No.2049 of 2003, dated 07.06.2003 from Karri Surya Narayana and his son Karri Surya Nageswara Rao.

3. The 2nd petitioner purchased 40 cents equivalent to 1936 Sq. Yds., or 1618.74 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.15/1C and 2 cents equivalent to 96.8 Sq. Yds., or 80.94 Sq. Mts., under a registered document bearing No.4019 of 2006, dated 29.07.2006 from Karri Naganna, S/o. Paradesi Naidu and his sons. Since the date of purchase, the petitioners is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the said land and there is no dispute with regard to the purchase.

4. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in total purchased Ac.1.50 cents equivalent to 7260 Sq. Yds., equivalent 6070.285 Sq. Mts., in Sy.No.15/1A, 15/1C, 15/2, 15/6, 15/7 and 15/8, after verifying the settlement fair addangals, pattadar pass books by issued by the 6th respondent of the land on ground, having purchased the same under different sale deeds, situated at Gavar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document