GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. DISPLACED RYOTS ASSOCIATION OF POTHUNURI VEERA BRAHMANDRA RESERVIOR PWV TGP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal has been placed in this list for hearing after having an order of remand from the Supreme Court for further consideration of the Appeal. The Supreme Court, while dealing with the matter observed : ''We have read the brief order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellants before us. Having heard Counsel and seen the proceedings, we are of the view that the writ appeal deserves deeper consideration than has been bestowed on it. To avoid prejudicing the case on either side, we refrain from saying more. The appeal is allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. The writ appeal (Writ Appeal No.852 of 1997) is restored to the file of the High Court to be heard and disposed of on merits."

(2.) Incidentally, a Division Bench of this Court dismissed the appeal of the State Government inter alia recording the following : "Learned single Judge has taken notice of the negotiable rate which the Government has accepted for payment to land oustees in G.O. Ms. No.91, Irrigation and CAD (Project Wing TGP.II) Department, dated 6-5-1991 and observed that in case the petitioners are found to be land oustees, there should be no quarrel of rate if they accept compensation rate in G.O.Ms. No. of 91. If they do not do so, obviously, the matter has to be proceeded strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, and in the event, of any objection to the quantum of compensation in the award, reference be made to the Civil Court. We are not persuaded on the facts of the case to take a different view."Be it noted that the learned single Judge on one aspect of the matter, did not record the following : ".... What is fixed for the lands acquired under Srisailam Project cannot be fixed for the lands acquired under Telugu Ganga and Somasila Projects. If the petitioner and other land oustees of the villages mentioned above agree for the compensation as fixed under G.O. Ms. No.91, dated 6-5-1991, they can do so and if they do not want to settle their cases through Lok Adalats, they have to pursue their reference cases under Section 18 of the Act."No exception, however, can be taken to this part of the order of the learned single Judge, wherein it has been categorically recorded that if the land oustees do not want to settle their cases through Lok Adalats, they have to pursue their references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) But we cannot possibly lend our concurrence to the findings of the learned single Judge on the other aspect of the matter viz., the pretended discrimination pertaining to award of compensation as between Srisailam Project area and Telugu Ganga and Somasila Project areas and it is on this count only that the learned Additional Advocate-General, appearing in support of the appeal, also strongly contended that the observations of the learned single Judge cannot but be termed to be contrary to the provisions of the statute and as such no support can be given thereto. It has been further contended that since the statute has provided a remedy, the same ought to be made available to all and sundry, without any exception.