IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28134 of 2014 Between:
Vegunta Sri Devi, W/o. Uma Maheswara Rao, Aged 42 years, R/o. D.No.64-6-2, Patamata Lanka, Vijayawada & 3 others .. Petitioners AND Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways, New Delhi & 4 others .. Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28134 of 2014 ORDER:
Notification under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act’), was issued proposing to acquire 258351 square meters of land from Gollapudi Village to Vijayawada Bypass Section from Kilometers 0.000 to Kilometers 47.880 for the purpose of widening/extension of National Highway No.5. This acquisition also included huge extent of land in Nunna Village of Vijayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District. Lands of the petitioners are also included in the said acquisition notification. Insofar as petitioners are concerned, the lands of petitioners 1 to 3 to an extent of 589.33 square yards each and so far as the 4th petitioner is concerned, land to an extent of 1215.96 square yards was under acquisition. After conducting the due enquiry, compensation payable was determined as Rs.964/- per square meter based on the basic value of the lands obtained during the crucial period i.e., one year prior to notification under Section 3A of the Act. The petitioners appeared before the competent authority during the enquiry under Section 3G of the Act. Having come to know the determination of compensation which according to the petitioners is very low, the petitioners filed arbitration petitions before the Arbitrator and Additional Joint Collector, Krishna, on 29.05.2014 requesting to determine compensation at Rs.2,000/- per square yard and to pay interest on the compensation determined from 06.02.2013. The arbitration petitions are pending consideration of the Arbitrator and so far, no orders are passed.
2. This writ petition is instituted by the petitioners contending that in addition to the claim made in the arbitration petitions, the petitioners have also filed additional grounds in support of their claim and as per the additional grounds, the petitioners are now asking the Arbitrator to determine compensation at Rs.10,000/- per square yard in addition to other benefits. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Arbitrator is not considering the additional grounds filed by the petitioners.
3. As evident from the pleadings in the writ petition and as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have filed Arbitration petitions which are pending before the Arbitrator and in the arbitration petitions, the petitioners have also filed additional grounds in support of their claim and also asking for enhancement of the compensation. These are matters for the Arbitrator to consider.
4. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue submits that there is no material to substantiate non-consideration of the grievance. The claim is premature. The learned Government Pleader further submits that it is not stated as to when these additional grounds are filed and if filed whether they are received by the arbitrator. There is no material on record to show that the Arbitrator refused to consider the additional grounds.
5. As seen from record, the claim of the petitioners for enhancement of compensation is pending consideration by the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator considers the claim after hearing the petitioners as well as the Land Acquisition Officer. So far, the Arbitration proceedings have not commenced and are pending at the stage of filing of counter by the Land Acquisition Officer. It is, therefore, premature for the petitioners to contend that the Arbitrator has not taken note of their grievance. Thus, the writ petition is not maintainable.
6. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. It is needless to observe that if the petitioners have any grievance regarding non- consideration of their claim by the Arbitrator, they can always agitate their grievance after an award is passed on the issue of determination of enhanced compensation. It is also needless to observe that since, the arbitration proceedings are pending from May, 2014, it is necessary for the Arbitrator to dispose of the arbitration petitions, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 17th October, 2014 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.28134 of 2014 Date: 17th October, 2014 KL