The main legal point established in the judgment is that the 'no compensation' clause restricting the right of the assignees to claim full compensation is unconstitutional and infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 31-A of the Constitution. The judgment also emphasizes that even farmers granted leases of land under certain schemes are entitled to compensation equivalent to the full market value of the land and other benefits on par with full owners of the land.

JUDGMENT :

R.Raghunandan Rao, J.

Heard the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, appearing for the appellants and Sri P. Gangi Rami Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4.

2. Respondents 1 to 4 had been occupation of various extents of land in Gudavolu village and had been cultivating the said lands. The extent and location of the said land is not in dispute. The dispute is only on the question of whether the respondents, whose lands have now been taken over by the State and have been submerged, under the Kandaleru Reservoir of Telugu Ganga Project, are to be paid compensation, in terms of the judgment of the Larger Bench of this Court in Land Acquisition Officer-cum-R.D.O., Chevella Division, Hyderabad and Others vs. Mekala Pandu and Others, (2004) 2 ALT 546 (L.B). In this case, the Larger Bench was considering the question of whether assignees, who had been granted assignment under DKT pattas were entitled only for ex gratia or for payment and benefits on par with full owners of land even where the assigned land is taken over by State, in accordance with the terms of grant or patta, where such resumption is for a public purpose. The Larger Bench after considering the entire law on the issue, had held that the compensation clause restricting the right of the assignees to claim full compensation is unconstitutional and that, such assignees are entitled for the same compensation as is being paid to full owners of the land. This decision of the Larger Bench was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the said challenge was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by an order dated 04.08.2014 in Civil Appeal No.7904 of 2012 and Batch.

3. Respondents 1 to 4 being aggrieved by non grant of compensation, on par with the owners of land in the neighbouring area, had approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.6666 of 2009, claiming compensation on par with all the land losers who were owners of the land. This Writ Petition was allowed by a learned single judge, by an order dated 14.10.2023, directing the appellants herein to pay full compensation with full consequential benefits to the respondents, on par with full owners of land. The appellants were permitted to deduct the payments, which had already been made, in the form of ex gratia.

4. Aggrieved by the said order, the Special Collector (Land Acquisition) and The Special Deputy Collector, Telugu Ganga Project have approached this Court, by way of the present Writ Appeal. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, appearing for the appellants, contends that the respondents 1 to 4 are not assignees as they had been granted land as members of a Cooperative Farming Society Scheme and are only lessees under the CJFS Scheme. She would submit that these persons are not on par with D.K Patta holders and as such are not entitled to the benefit of the Judgment of the Larger Bench in the case of Land Acquisition Officer-cum-R.D.O., Chevella Division, Hyderabad and Others vs. Mekala Pandu and Others., nor to the benefits set out under G.O.Ms.No.259 Revenue (Assn-1) Dept., dated 21.06.2016. The question of whether lessees under the Cooperative Joint Forming Society Scheme should be equated with assignees holding DKT pattas had came up before this Court. A learned Single Judge, by an order dated 06.08.2018 in W.P.No.35981 of 2015, after considering the same issue had held that even lands given for displaced person under the Cooperative Joint Farming Society Scheme would be entitled to the benefit of Mekala Pandu's case. This Judgment was reaffirmed by the learned Single Judge, by his order dated 10.10.2018 In W.P.No.4486 of 2018.

5. In MEKALA PANDU, the larger Bench held as follows:

82. The assignees are constitutional claimants. The constitutional claim cannot be subjected to governmental restrictions or sanctions except pursuant to the constitutionally valid rule or law. There is no legislation enacted by the State compelling it to assign the lands to the weaker sectio