PEELA POTHI NAIDU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In what is called as Yeleru Scam, the Government of Andhra Pradesh had appointed the Commission first headed by Justice S.R Nayak, a sitting Judge of this Court by G.O. Ms. No.83, Revenue Department, dated 5-2-1997. As Justice S.R. Nayak had resigned, the Government had reconstituted the Commission with Justice B.K. Somasekhara vide G.O. Ms. No.468, Revenue (LA) Department, dated 2-6-1997.

(2.) The petitioner is a practising advocate at Visakhapatnam and had appeared in land acquisition cases pertaining to which the above Commission was constituted. He has questioned the said Constitution of the Commission. Firstly, he had moved the Supreme Court by filing WP(Crl.) 99 of 1998, but it is stated that the Supreme Court had opined that the petitioner had to first approach this Court and as such, the petitioner had withdrawn the writ petition and by order dated 15-5-1998, the Supreme Court had dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn observing "leaving it open to the petitioner to rake-up the matter in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India." Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) (a) Facts relevant for adjudication of this writ petition need to be stated. For construction of Yeleru Left Canal, land in Visakhapatnam District was acquired, on the requisition of the Irrigation Department. Awards were passed by the Land Acquisition Officers after completing the formalities under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Not satisfied with the quantum of compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officers, the Awardees sought reference under Section 18 and the Subordinate Courts of Anakapally and Chodavaram had answered the references. Compensation was enhanced. The process of acquisition had started in the year 1980 and after 15 years, the same had culminated into awards passed by the civil Courts mentioned above. In the meanwhile, another set of acquisition proposals for house sites for poor was initiated by the Social Welfare Department and there also, the compensation was determined. The compensation which was determined by the civil Courts was found to be too exorbitant, as compared to compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officers and when this came to the notice of the public functionaries leading to comments and ultimately enquiries, lot of irregularities said to have surfaced and the cognizance of the same was taken by the Government during the month of November, 1996. On judicial side, the High Court was also apprised by the District Judge, Visakhapatnam. Firstly, Criminal Prosecution was launched in Crime No.327 of 1996 of Anakapalle Town Police Station for the offences under Sections 466, 467, 468, 409, 406, 471, 474, 419, 420 read with Sections 120-B and 109 of IPC. The above prosecution relates to the cases at Anakapalle. After some more enquiries, the CID officials found that there are also offences committed regarding payment of compensation for the lands acquired at other places and Crime Nos.6 and 7 of 1997 were registered. With regard to the lands acquired by Social Welfare Department for house sites for poor of Pisinikada village, Crime No. 10 of 1997 was registered. Before the action was initiated, some part of the compensation amount was already withdrawn and when an amount of Rs.6.55 crores was deposited, the Subordinate Judge, Chodavaram entertained a doubt as to whether the compensation has to be paid or not and then asked for clarification from the District Judge, Visakhapatnam, who, by his letter dated 9-12-1996 sought guidance from this Court, The said letter reads thus :