IMPORTANT POINT
The acquisition proceedings under Award No.12/83 were held not to lapse in terms of Sec. 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act and they will continue.

JUDGMENT

1. The writ petitioners in both these writ petitions are common. In W.P.No.353/2018, there are six respondents, out of which respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 are arrayed as respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.No.1779/2018. The pleadings of parties in both the writ petitions are identical.

2. The petitioners' case is thus:

(a) The petitioners 1 to 5 are legal heirs of one Kundrapu Appala Naidu and 6th petitioner is the son of late Koruprolu Dalayya. Kundrapu Appala Naidu and Koruprolu Dalayya jointly purchased an agricultural land in an extent of Ac.3.00 cents vide Patta No.8 of Bhimavarapukota, Kotanandur Mandal, East Godavari District under a registered Sale Deed dtd. 30/5/1955 vide document No.1764/1955. Ever since they were in joint possession and enjoyment of the said land.

(b) The 3rd respondent acquired an extent of Ac.7.78 cents of land covered by Sy.nos.47/1A, 47/1B and 47/3A in an extent of Ac.1.36 cents, Ac.0.90 cents and Ac.0.72 cents belong to the petitioners and some other lands of others for issuing house site pattas to the houseless poor. In Sec. 4(1) notification, the name of Koruprolu Dalayya i.e., father of 6th petitioner was shown, however, both the joint owners had agreed for proposed acquisition. Accordingly, the 3rd respondent passed an Award No.12/83 dtd. 8/11/1983 fixing compensation of Rs.20,150.00 for the joint land of the petitioners. Though award was passed, neither possession was taken nor compensation was paid to the original owners or to their LRs i.e., petitioners. While so, the original owners of the land died in the year 1999 and ever since the petitioners have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the acquired land without any let of hindrance.

(c) While so, the 4th respondent in W.P.No.353/2018 i.e., Gram Panchayat of Bhimavarapukota proposed to lay the road through the lands of petitioners and made an attempt in that regard on 25/12/2017 without following due procedure. The petitioners resisted the said illegal act of 4th respondent. The petitioners made a representation to 2nd respondent informing the highhanded act of the 4th respondent. They also made a representation dtd. 27/12/2017 to the Tahsildar, Kotanandur Mandal (6th respondent) under the Right to Information Act seeking information as to whom the compensation was allegedly paid, but till now there is no information from the said authority. However, the Tahsildar confirmed the possession of the petitioners over the subject land.

(d) Petitioners' case ultimately is that though award was passed in the year 1983, neither possession was taken nor compensation was paid to the original owners or their LRs and on the other hand, the petitioners have been in continuous possession of the subject land. Therefore, in terms of Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (for short, 'the RFCTLARR Act'), the acquisition so far as the petitioners' land is concerned, lapsed and therefore, the respondents cannot have any right to meddle with the petitioners' properties. If the respondent authorities require the land of the petitioners for laying the road or for some other public purpose, they should follow due process of law.

(e) With the above averments initially W.P.No.353/2018 was filed seeking the relief of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 4 and 5 therein proposing to lay road in the petitioners' land without following due procedure as illegal and to consequently direct the respondents to follow the procedure if they want to lay the road.

3. Subsequently the petitioners filed W.P.No.1779/2018 seeking mandamus declaring the land acquisition Award No.12/83 dtd. 8/11/1983 passed by 3rd respondent insofar as the land situated in Sy.nos.47/1A, 47/1B and 47/3A in an extent of Ac. Ac.1.36 cents, Ac.0.90 cents and Ac.0.72 cents of Bhimavarapukota village is null and unenforceable and lapsed in the light of Sec. 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act and consequently direct