HONOURBLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21321 OF 1999 DATED 25TH AUGUST, 2014.
BETWEEN J.Venkata Narasaiah and anr ….Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. District Collector, Chittoor and ors ….Respondents.
HONOURBLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21321 OF 1999
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the respondents.
The petitioners purchased an extent of Ac.0.07 cents each in Sy.Nos. 82/1 and 84/1 of Akkaram pally village in Tirupathi (Urban) Mandal, Chittoor District for valuable consideration in the year 1979. Since the date of purchase, they had been in possession of the said land and they utilized the said land for cultivation. In the year 1985 the fourth respondent acquired the said land for the purpose of road widening with an assurance to provide alternative land to the petitioners. Accordingly the fourth respondent addressed letter dated 28.11.1985 to the fifth respondent to provide alternative land to the petitioners in lieu of acquiring their land for road widening. It was followed by letter dated 25.6.1986. Ultimately fifth respondent by letter dated 18.9.1986 through second and first respondents submitted that the land of the petitioners was acquired by the fourth respondent for the purpose of road widening and that the petitioners refused to take compensation in lieu of assurance to provide alternative land and recommended that the petitioners are eligible for providing alternative land. Correspondence went on among the various departments and ultimately it was reported that no land was available in Urban and Rural areas of Tirupathi since from the date of litigation. However, the case of the petitioners is that their land was acquired for the purpose of road widening and that the correspondence that went thereon shows that an assurance of providing alternative site was given in lieu of loss of land by them. As no action is taken by the respondents for providing alternative land, the present Writ Petition is filed.
Even after lapse of fifteen years, no counter affidavit is filed by the respondents.
A perusal of the correspondence of the fourth respondent shows that the land of the petitioners was taken over for the purpose of road widening and the fourth respondent gave assurance to the petitioners for providing alternative site initially in Tirupathi Urban area and later in Tirupathi Rural area, but the same did not materialize. The petitioners’ contention is that they are pursuing their case relentlessly for alternative land as they lost their own land. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioners based on the earlier assurance given to them and correspondence that went thereon and if possible provide them alternative site available in the vicinity of their acquired land for the purpose of road widening within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, it is made clear that in case no land is available, compensation may be paid to the petitioners in accordance with law.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO Dated 25th August, 2014. Msnro