GOVERNMENT OF A P Vs. J RAGHOTHAMA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ appeals are Sled against the judgment of a learned single Judge in two writ petitions filed by the same petitioner. OB 12-6-86 W P No. 8963/81 was allowed granting a mandamus directing the two respondents therein, that is the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, to initiate land acquisition proceedings in respect of survey numbers 7 and 13 situated at Thotaguda village, Hyderabad Urban Taluk; and on the same day the other writ petition No. 9793/83 seeking to quash the order of the Competent authority under the Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, as confirmed by the appellate authority, was disposed of as unnecessary in view of the decision in the earlier writ petition. However, by a subsequent order dt. 21-10-86 the learned Judge has substituted the order in the latter writ petition by an order allowing it and giving a direction that in view of the judgment in the earlier writ petition the land in those survey numbers shall not be included in the Urban Land Ceiling of the petitioner.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition has appeared in W A No. 1191/86 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue in W A No. 1314/90 for the appellants. Sri. V Venkataramanaiah, learned counsel has appeared for the writ petitioner- contesting respondent in both the cases., Sri Khader Ali Khan standing counsel for the Municipal Corporatien of Hyderabad has appeared at the hearing. We have heard the counsel for the parties at some length.

(3.) It is necessary to state the relevant facts whick have given rise to the sontroversy leading to the first writ petition (W P No: 8963/81). The Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued a notification under See. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, which was published in tke gazette OB 9-6-66 to acquire certain lands in and around Imliban for a public purpose viz, to construct a weir to protect certain area from floods in river Moosi. This notification included four survey numbers viz. 7, 13, 12 and 14 of village Thotaguda, which are claimed by the writ petitioner as belonging to him on the basis of a registered sale deed of 1966. The petitioner did not object to the acquisition in the 5-A enquiry. However, in respect of the lands bearing numbers 7 and 13 and some others the Government dropped the acquisition proposals invoking the provisions of Section 48 published in G O Ms No. 1429 dt: 16-7-71 on the plea that tkey are Government lands. It is to be noticed that urgency clause was not invoked and by that time possession was not taken of the land to be acquired. However, possession was taken with the consent of the owners on 12-10-73 of the lands which remained the subject matter of acquisition proceedings including S. Nos 12 and 14 i.e. after dropping of proposals of S. Nos. 7 and 13 in 1971. The acquisition proceedings were completed by passing of award in 1974 and have become final so far as survey numbers 12 and 14 are concerned.