The court ruled that disputed questions of fact regarding land possession cannot be resolved in writ proceedings, necessitating civil suit recourse.

ORDER :

SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J.

1. Petitioners, 57 in number filed the above writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

"... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondent No.1 to 3 in paying the 50% Ex- gratia in respect of acquired agricultural lands of various extents in Sy.Nos.192, 209 & 224 situated at Ponnam Palli Village, Mylavaram Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District belongs to petitioners as per the Government land allotment policy vide G.O.Ms.No.571 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 14.09.2012 is as being arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14 & 300-A of Constitution of India apart from being violative of principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondent No.2 & 3 to pay 50% Ex-gratia in respect of acquired agricultural lands of various extents in Sy.Nos.192, 209 and 224 situated at Ponnam Palli Village, Mylavaram Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District belongs to petitioners as per the Government land allotment policy orders vide G.O.Ms.No.571 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department dated 14.09.2012 and pass such other order or orders ..."

2. a) Petitioner No.2 deposed the affidavit on his behalf as well as on behalf of other petitioners. It was contended, inter alia, that petitioners cultivated different extents of agricultural lands in survey Nos.192, 209 and 224 of Ponnam Palli Village, Mylavaram Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District. The particulars of the extents of land over which petitioners are claiming possession are as follows:

Petitioners cultivated their respective lands, as mentioned supra, from 2008 to 2014. Thereafter, due to drought, most of the petitioners migrated to different places to eke out their livelihood.

b) While so, Chairman and Managing Director, NREDCAP made requisition for allotment of Government land. Respondent No.2 allotted various extents of Government land including the lands cultivated by petitioners during the period 2008 to 2014.

c) The extents of the land, where petitioners cultivated were taken over by respondent Nos.2 to 4 and, in turn, allotted to Solar Power Project. Petitioners immediately approached respondent Nos.2 to 4 seeking compensation by way of ex-gratia. Petitioners made representations dated 04.05.2019 and 22.07.2019 to respondent Nos.3 and 4 respectively. Respondent No.3 called for a report from respondent No.4. Pursuant to letter Ref.No.A/1272/2015, dated 29.07.2019, addressed by respondent No.3, respondent No.4, vide Ref.No.A/65/2020 dated 18.05.2020 submitted comprehensive report along with statement showing the details. The said report discloses cultivation of land by the petitioners and, also possession of the petitioners over their respective extents in survey Nos.192, 209 and 224, as mentioned supra, from fasli 1417 to 1422. Respondent No.4 further reported to respondent No.3 about 'Government Allotment Policy' vide G.O.Ms.No.571 Revenue (Assignment-I) Department, dated 14.09.2012. Since petitioners were in occupation of the lands between five to ten years, they are entitled to 50% ex-gratia equivalent to market value. However, ex-gratia is not paid. Hence, the writ petition.

d) In support of petitioners' case, petitioners filed adangals for fasli 1417 to 1422 (calendar years 2008 to 2014).

3. a) Counter affidavit, deposed by respondent No.4, was filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4. It was contended inter alia,