The court emphasized the importance of treating applications filed by the writ petitioners as applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to forward the same to the Civil Court, ensuring that the claim of the applicants should not be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

JUDGMENT :

Satish Chandra Sharma, J.

The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated 12.07.2010 passed in Writ Petition No.21910 of 2002.

2. The facts of the case reveal that the appellants/writ petitioners, who are small farmers and owners of land situate at Bhoopalpally Village, Warangal District, came up before this Court by filing the above writ petition with a prayer to direct the respondents to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) to the Civil Court.

3. The facts would further reveal that land to an extent of Acs.192.12 gts. situate in Survey Nos.326, 327 and 328 belonging to writ petitioners, was subjected to proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the respondent and an award was passed in the matter. The writ petitioners submitted original applications/petitions on 11.04.2000 for referring the matter under Section 18 of the Act to the Civil Court. It was stated by the writ petitioners in the aforesaid applications that the subject land was being used for cultivation and they have raised mango, lime, coconut gardens and also raised eucalyptus, eppa, kududu and tunki trees, and therefore, enhancement was sought for Rs.21,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre. The sole grievance of the writ petitioners was that their applications were not forwarded to the Civil Court. Admittedly, the Award was passed on 14.03.2000, and the writ petition was filed in the year 2002. Counter-affidavit was filed in the matter, and the State Government took a plea that the applications preferred by writ petitioners under Section 18 of the Act are not available, and there are no entries in the Inward Register. The matter was again taken up on 02.07.2010, and the learned counsel for the writ petitioners/appellants took time to file reply-affidavit. The reply-affidavit was filed and along with the reply-affidavit copies of the original applications/petitions filed under Section 18 of the Act were enclosed. In the reply-affidavit, the writ petitioners also brought on record the acknowledgments in receipt of the original applications/petitions obtained by them; and it was also stated that the Inward Register, which has been filed by the State Government, is not relevant for the period in question. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition by passing the following order which is reproduced as under :

“ORDER :

The extent of Acs.192.12 in S.Nos.326, 327, 328 etc., situated at Bhoopalpally Village in Warangal District, was proposed to be acquired for mining in KTK-5 & 5A of Singareni Collieries. Petitioners are allegedly residents of Bhoopalpally Village owning different extents of lands where they raised mango, lime, coconut gardens and also raised eucalyptus, eppa, kukudu and tunki trees. Petitioners allegedly submitted applications on 11.04.2000 seeking reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) to the Civil Court. They sought enhancement of compensation from Rs.21,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre. Alleging that the respondent failed to refer the cases to Civil Court, they filed instant writ petition on 31.10.2002.

The counter-affidavit is filed admitting the acquisition and passing of award for Rs.21,000/- per acre. It is however stated that petitioners’ counsel did not submit any application on 11.04.2000 and that there are no entries in the Inward Register.

The matter was called on 02.07.2010. At the request of the counsel for petitioners, the matter was adjourned to enable the petitioners to file reply-affidavit. A reply affidavit is filed enclosing the copies of original applications/petitions filed under Section 18 of the Act. It is stated that counsel for petitioners submitted applications/petitions under Section 18 of the Act to respondent and also obtained acknowledgments in receipt of the applications on the face of copies of applications. It is also stated that Inward Register containing 37 pages is not for the relevant period.

This Court he