LAWS(APH)-2008-7-78

CHINNARI JAGGA RAO Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR VIZAYANAGARAM DISTRICT

Decided On July 29, 2008
CHINNARI JAGGA RAO Appellant
V/S
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZAYANAGARAM DISTRICT, VIZAYANAGARAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not initiating proceedings for acquisition of lands admeasuring Acs. 18. 40 cents comprised in survey Nos. 24 to 34 in Peddavalsa @ gadabavalasam in Pedamarangi Revenue village of Giyyamavalasa Mandal, vizianagaram District, belonging to the petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300a of the Constitution of India. The petitioners sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to pay compensation as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act' ).

(2.) THE petitioners claim that they are the owners of the above-mentioned land and that possession of the said land was taken in the year 1990-91 from them for provision of rehabilitation of the tribal victims for construction of housing colony and agricultural purposes. In the affidavit, they averred that in spite of their approaching the respondents time and again, no action has been taken to acquire their land, out of which, Acs. 2. 01 cents was utilized for construction of housing colony and Acs. 16. 19 cents was allotted to the tribals for agricultural purposes. They further averred that respondent No. 4 vide letter bearing RR. C. No. 867/98, dated Nil. 11. 1998 requested respondent No. l to take expeditious action to purchase the land admeasuring acs. 16. 19 cents from out of ITDA funds and process the land acquisition proposals and that in spite of the same, respondent no. l has not taken any action. The petitioners, therefore, filed the present writ petition.

(3.) NO counter-affidavit was filed for about 8 years after filing of the writ petition. However, this Court at the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for land Acquisition made on 21. 7. 2008 and also on 28. 7. 2008, adjourned the case to enable the respondents to file counter-affidavit. Today, at the hearing, counter-affidavit along with certain enclosures has been furnished to the Court.