K RAMACHANDRA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner herein filed a declaration under the Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 along with his four major sons before the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kavali. The Tribunal held that the petitioner was in excess of the ceiling area by the petitioner surrendered Ac. 42-80 cents of dry land of the Government and the later had also taken possession of the land on 8-8-76.

(2.) After the A. P. Land Reforms Amendment Act 10 of 1977 came into force, the petitioner filed a petition before the Land Reforms Tribunal, Kavali, for fresh determination of his holding as per Sec. 4-A of the Amending Act 10 Tribunal held that the petitioner was in excess by only Ac. 5-60 cents and he was entitled for re-conveyance of Ac. 37-20 cents of land our of Ac. 42-80 cents held to be in excess on an earlier occasion Thereafter the petitioner sent petitions to the Revenue Divisional Officer Kavali and to the Tahsildar, Kovur to implement that order. Subsequently he came to know that the District Collector. Nellore decided on 3-10-77, under sub-s, (5) of S. 7 of the A. P. Land Reforms Amendment Act 10 of 1977 not to reconvey the land to the petitioner but to pay him in lieu thereof an amount payable under the proviso to that section. On coming to know that the preliminary valuation of the property was being prepared by the Tahsildar, Kovur, the petitioner has sent some particulars to the Tahsildar through registered post on 26-1177. According to the petitioner ignoring the material supplied by him the District Collector had arbitrarily fixed the amount of compensation in a sum of Rs. 21,390.00 on 10-7-78 and forwarded it to the Government for its approval. That amount was calculated at Rs. 500.00 per acre as market value plus 15% solatium thereon. The Government took two years to approve and finally gave its approval on 11-91981. According to the petitioner the market value fixed at Rs. 500.00 per acre is very much below the market value of the land. Therefore, he received that amount under protest on 10-101980. Thereafter he sent a petition to the district Collector through registered post on 20-11-1980 requesting him to refer the matter to the civil Court under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 read with the proviso to sub-sec. (5) of Section 7 of the A. P. Land Reforms Amendment act 10 of 1977. The petition was received in the Collectors office on 21-11-1980. Since the petitioner had no information either according to his request or rejecting it, he had filed this writ petition on 5-11-1981. In this writ petition he seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent, i.e., the District Collector, Nellore, to refer the matter under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 to the Sub-Court, Nellore against the determination of compensation by him.

(3.) No counter has been filed by the respondents. The question for my consideration is whether the petitioner can ask for a reference under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act against the decision of the District Collector under the proviso to sub -sec.(5) of s. 7 of the A. P. Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Amendment Act 10 of 1977. S. 7 of the Act is a long section and it is not necessary for me to refer to the entire section. Suffice it if I refer to sub-sec. (5) of that section which reads as follow :