MUDDAM SUBBARAJU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in the present writ petition challenge the order passed by the 3rd respondent vide No:SE/NTR.TGP Circle/KdP/EC5/641 M, dtd. 8/8/2019, rejecting their request for providing employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (PROJ.WING) Department, dtd. 15/4/1986 and G.O.Ms.No.45, Irrigation & C.A.D. (PW:R&R-A2) Department, dtd. 4/7/2012, as arbitrary and illegal.

(2.) (a) Petitioners are displaced persons affected by Sri Pothuluri Veera Brahmendra Reservoir. Petitioners' lands were acquired for the aforesaid project and were paid compensation in terms of Award No.4/1987, dtd. 9/3/1987, Award No.28/1987, dtd. 31/7/1987 and Award No.12/1988, dtd. 25/9/1988. The acquisition of lands was done while they were in the hands of the petitioners' fathers.

(3.) Respondents 1 to 3 filed counter admitting that petitioners' lands and houses were acquired for the project and they were paid compensation under the awards mentioned above. Insofar as the claim of petitioners fathers that they made applications for employment, it is stated that the competent authority for receiving such applications being District Selection Committee headed by District Collector, Kadapa, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.266, Irrigation and CAD (PW) Department, dtd. 19/9/1994, the list prepared by Special Deputy Collector (LA) as furnished by petitioners has no sanctity and cannot be taken into consideration. The list prepared by District Collector does not contain the names of fathers of petitioners being original awardees, which clearly implies that they never made any application in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, dtd. 15/4/1986. It is further stated that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, any application for employment should be preferred within one year from the date of displacement and that the date of displacement as declared for this project was the date of impounding of water, which was on 19/9/2005, the petitioners applications which were made on 11/7/2014 and 7/11/2014 at much later point of time cannot be considered to be valid applications, even if they were to be applications for substitution of names.