ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “ ... to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in not referring the application of the Petitioner Dt. 28/02/2016 made U/s. 64 of Act 30/2013, to the Authority in respect of the H.No. 2-20/1 (Abadi) situated at Rudravaram Village of Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilta District as illegal and arbitrary action and also violative of Art., 14, 16, 21 of the 300-A of the Constitution of India and provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 30 of 2013 and consequently direct the 4th Respondent herein to refer the matter to the Authority U/Sec. 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 30/2013 forthwith.”

2. Heard Mr.Ch.Shiva Kumar Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.K.Radha Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. With the consent of the respective parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

4. Facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner is claiming that he is the owner of house bearing No.2- 20/1 (Abadi) in an extent of 45 square yards situated at Rudravaram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. The respondent authorities acquired the subject property for the purpose of construction of Mid Manair. In the said project, the entire village of Rudravaram submerged. Respondent No.4 passed award dated --.02.2016 invoking the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “the Act”) and awarded meager compensation. Not satisfying with the same, the petitioner submitted an application on 28.02.2016 before respondent No.4 requesting him to refer the matter to the competent authority for determination of proper compensation. In spite of the same, respondent No.4 has not taken any steps to consider the claim of the petitioner and the same is in gross violation of the provisions of the Act.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has submitted application on 28.02.2016 requesting respondent No.4 to refer the matter to the competent authority under Section 64 of the Act, respondent No.4 has not taken any steps. He further submits that similarly situated claimants belonging to the very same village have approached this Court and filed W.P.No. 1378 of 2018 and the same was disposed of directing the land acquisition officer to consider the application in terms of Section 64 of the Act by fixing time limit. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the very same relief.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition submits that if the application submitted by the petitioner dated 28.02.2016 is still pending, respondent No.4 will consider the same in accordance with law and requested this Court to grant reasonable time.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner is claiming that he is the owner of house bearing No.2- 20/1 (Abadi) in an extent of 45 square yards situated at Rudravaram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Siricilla District and the said property was acquired for the purpose of construction of Mid Manair and the land acquisition officer had passed award on --.02.2016 vide Lr.No.B/221/2007-VII-Patta-MP. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application before respondent No.4 on 28.02.2016 requesting him to refer the matter to the competent authority under Section 64 of the Act seeking enhancement of compensation.

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct respondent No.4 to consider the applic