THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND And THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA LAAS No.347 of 2013 and 325 of 2018 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Hari Haranadha Sarma)

Introductory:-

[i] These Appeals are filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short ‘the Act’ ] and directed against the orders dated 28.02.2013 passed in LAOP No.23 of 2005 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid.

[ii] The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.) and Land Acquisition Officer, Vijayawada, who made reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is the appellant in LAAS No.347 of 2013 and the appeal in LAAS No.325 of

2018 is filed by the claimant /Patapanchula Narasimha Rao.

2. Questioning the compensation fixed as excessive, the Referring Officer has filed the appeal, whereas questioning the compensation awarded as inadequate and insufficient, the claimant has filed the appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, parties will be referred to as ‘the claimant”

and referring officer.

4. [i] For the construction of Booster Station by the Gas Authority of India Ltd., Vijayawada, land measuring Ac.23.36 cents in G. Konduru village was acquired under award No.1/2003, dated 02.08.2003, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for certain lands and Rs.1,25,000/- per acre for certain other lands, apart from other incidental benefits.

[ii] Considering the protest of the claimant as to inadequacy of compensation and the price fixed and also the objection as to non-consideration of crop etc., reference was made in terms of section 18 of the land Acquisition Act.

Case of the claimant :-

5. [i] The land of claimant/Patapanchala Narasimha Rao, in an extent of Ac.2.32 cents out of total extent of Ac.3.31 cents in R.S.No. in R.S.No.244/1 of G.Konduru village, was acquired and he was cultivating cotton crop in an extent of Ac.0.60 cents and drumstick crop in Ac.1.63cents.

[ii] Land Acquisition Officer failed to consider the circumstances and mechanically fixed the compensation, which is very low.

[iii] The land fetched @Rs.16,00,000/- per acre, when it is sold as residential plots, in surrounding areas.

[iv] Minimum value of the land cost is @Rs.12,50,000/- which was ignored.

[v] Advance possession was taken.

[vi] As promised employment was not provided to the claimant.

[vii] Compensation fixed for the crop @Rs.60,510/- is also very low.

[viii] The claimant is entitled for compensation for the land @Rs.5,00,000/-

per acre as minimum and more than what is awarded for standing crop, trees and plants.

Case of the Land Acquisition Officer:-

6. [i] The amounts referred by the claimant are exaggerated.

[ii] The sale transactions in the village for the relevant period were rightly considered, covering the years 1999 to 2002.

[iii] Registration statistics for (3) years preceding the last date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, was considered.

[iv] Two sales in the year 1999, 34 sales in the year 2000, 27 sales in the year 2001, 16 sales in the year 2002, were considered and the market value was fixed @Rs.1,25,000/- per acre in respect of the lands nearer to the road and Rs.1,00,000/- per acre in respect of the lands away from the road.

[v] As per the basic register maintained by the Sub-Registrar, the value of the land is Rs.40,000/- per acre.

[vi] The rates of cotton paddy, para grass, Deenanadh grass, green gram, red gram and black gram were obtained from the Assistant Director of agriculture and for drumstick crop, opinion was given by the Commissioner and Director of Horticulture, A.P.. The land value and solatium and additional allowances, compensation, value of trees etc., fixed are at reasonable.

Findings of the Referral Court:-

7. [i] As per the evidence of witnesses, the acquired land is up level dry land and it is suitable for house sites.

[ii] In respect of certain lands the sale transactions is ranging around Rs.9,68,000/- per acre. Since the said sales a