Point of Law: prayer of the petitioners is to restrain the official respondents from granting permission to convert the land from industrial to residential. But, this Court cannot issue such direction restraining the official respondents from discharging their public duties.

ORDER :

1. One G.Ganesh and 48 others filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.9 in converting the industrial land into residential plots and carrying on Real Estate business in the land assigned to Nizam Sugars Limited/respondent No.10 as illegal arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law, and principles of natural justice guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to permit respondent No.9 to lay plots and to re-convey the land belonging to the petitioners.

2. The petitioners were all agriculturists living by agriculture, owned the land in Sy.Nos.358-1, 359-1, 359-2, 360, 361-1, 361-2, 367-1, 367-2, 367-3, 368-1A, 368-2, Pargi Village, Hindupur Taluq, Ananthapuram District. While they were living by cultivating the above land, the Government acquired the land for establishing a Sugar factory in terms of the requisition from the Secretary and Chief Accountant, Nizam Sugar Factory Limited, Hyderabad in the limits of Parigi Village. Thereafter, the government issued G.O.RT.No.495 dated 08.06.1977 for establishing a sugar factory at Parigi. Further, the Industries and Commerce Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued an order sanctioning an amount of Rs.100/- towards the State Government contribution for payment of compensation in respect of their land notified in the G.O. for the establishment of Sugar factory at Parigi.

3. The Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Collector, Penukonda, passed an Award vide Award No.1/78-79 dated 22.04.1978 and took possession of the land for the Nizam Sugar Factory at Parigi on 28.04.1977. Out of Ac.150.00 cents of land acquired, the factory was constructed in the land admeasuring Ac.12.42 cents in Sy.No.360 and Ac.6.40, 4.60, 7.63 in Sy.No.367/1, 367/2, 367/4, total extent of Ac.31.05 cents was utilized for quarters. The petitioners Nos.12, 13, 21, 22 were not paid any compensation for the land admeasuring Ac.4.90 cents in Sy.No.359/2 and Ac.2.00 in Sy.No. 368/2 till date as the land acquired was assigned land. The total extent of assigned land is about Ac.12.32 cents and the other assignees were also not paid any compensation.

4. The land belonging to Sri Lord Anjaneya Swamy Temple in Sy.No.294/3 admeasuring Ac.10.26 and Sy.No.293 admeasuring Ac.6.02 cents was also acquired, but the temple refused to receive the compensation and the said amount was deposited under the revenue Deposit, thereafter the petitioners are not aware of payment of compensation.

5. The Tahsildar, Hindupur addressed a letter to the General Manager, Nizam Sugar Factory Limited on 06.01.1982 handing over the land admeasuring Ac.143.56 cents. Thereafter, respondent No.10 constructed a Sugar Factory in the said land, but the same was not operated for long and the villagers employed therein where thrown on streets. The State Government owned 49% share in the factory and the remaining share was held by Delta Sugars. Nizam sugar factory has been laid off by Telangana Government in 2015 on the ground that they will completely handover the factory to the Government, but no action has been taken on factory and employees were not paid salaries for many years. The land of the petitioners was forcibly acquired by the Government and the Government has promised to provide employment to the family members of the petitioners. Despite the forcible acquisition, the petitioners did not assail the same in view of the Sovereign Promise made by the State and the share of the State Government imposing faith in the public acquiring valuable land.

6. It is the contention of the petitioners that when the land is acquired for industrial purpose and an industrial area is setup, there cannot be any residential activity in the land earmarked for industrial purpose. Contrary to the same, respo