ORDER:

The petitioner is the owner of 186 square yards of land in Sy.No.72-1B of Kalaparru Village, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District, having purchased 96 square yards of land in the year 1995 and 90 square yards of land in the year

2002 to form a single plot admeasuring 186 square yards. 2. A temple known as “Durga Malleswara Ammavari Temple” was constructed on this land. In the year 2013, in the course of six laning of the adjacent National Highway, about 126 square yards of land was taken over by the National Highway Authority of India and the existing temple was also damaged to that extent.

3. An award bearing No.14, dated 23.08.2013 was issued by the 4th respondent-Land Acquisition Officer awarding a compensation of Rs.7,88,587/-. This is an aggregate of Rs.1,47,647/- towards compensation for the land and Rs.6,40,940/- as compensation towards the damage to the temple. Notice of this award was given to the petitioner on the very same day, calling upon the petitioner to produce the documents of title to receive the compensation amount.

4. The petitioner submits that upon receipt of this intimation, the petitioner had produced his documents of title showing ownership over 186 square yards of land. However, the respondents did not release amount due to the petitioner.

Since, no amounts were being released, despite various representations made by the petitioner, he has approached this Court for a direction to the respondents to release the compensation awarded to the petitioner under Award No.14, dated 23.08.2013 along with appropriate interest.

5. The 3rd respondent-National Highway Authority of India and the 4th respondent-Land Acquisition Officer have filed their respective counters.

6. The 3rd respondent has taken the stand that upon compensation being fixed, it would be the responsibility of 3rd respondent to deposit the compensation with the competent authority for disbursement and the said responsibility was discharged by the 3rd respondent by depositing the amount of compensation fixed under Award No.14. It is submitted that after deposit of such amount, the acquired land was taken over and the six laning of the Highway has been completed.

7. The 4th respondent states that at the time when the petitioner produced his documents of title, petitions were received from Smt.N.Lakshmi Sujatha, Smt. K.Siva Leela, Smt.G.Rajeswari and Sri G.Narasimha Rao along with Sri Paruchuri Rama Krishna to the effect that the temple in the affected land had been constructed with the contributions of these persons and also that the religious activities in the temple were being carried with the contribution being raised from these persons from time to time. In these circumstances, the persons who had given petitions requested that the compensation fixed under the award should be released to the grama panchayat of the village to ensure that the money is used to rebuild the temple.

8. The further contention in the counter affidavit is that an enquiry was carried out to ascertain these facts and the petitioner had also agreed to the same by way of a written letter signed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner and the persons who had given the petitions were requested to form a committee to which the money could be released to enable the reconstruction of the temple.

9. Sri Velivela Sreenivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner disputes these facts and submits that the petitioner did not agree to any such proposal and he is entitled to payment of the entire compensation. He would submit that the award was made in favour of the petitioner and no petition or claim of any nature was filed by any person before the award was passed. He further submits that the 4th respondent cannot withhold the compensation awarded on 23.08.2013 and any attempt to withhold the said amounts is not permissible under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short “the Act”). He would further submit that except a vague set of allegations no detai