Sri Prasada Rao Mikkilineni & Ors. Vs. State of A.P. & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 2150 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 21026 of 1997)
Petitioner: Sri Prasada Rao Mikkilineni & Ors.
Respondent: State of A.P. & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 2150 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 21026 of 1997)
Judges: S.B. MAJMUDAR, Y.K. SABHARWAL & SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 16, 2000
Head Note:
Land Acquisition
Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Sections 18, 30 – Dispute about title and computation of compen-sation. Held High Court should have allowed the writ and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to make reference. Appeal allowed and directions issued to make reference. (Para 4)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally in this appeal.
3. A limited notice was issued at the S.L.P. stage on 10th November 1997 to the following effect:
“Delay condoned.
Issue notice for final disposal requiring the respondents to show cause why reference as asked for should not be made.”
4. We find that there is a dispute about the title as also regarding computation of appropriate compensation for acquiring the land in question. Hence, this is a fit case where the High Court should have allowed the writ petition and should have directed the Land Acquisition Officer to make reference under Section 18 read with Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. Only on this short ground, therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and the Land Acquisition Officer is directed to make a reference, under Section 18 read with Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, to the appropriate court within eight weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order at his end.
5. Office to send a copy of this order to the Spl. Dy. Collec-tor, Land Acquisition Officer (Central), Hyderabad (A.P) for necessary action.
6. No costs.
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally in this appeal.
3. A limited notice was issued at the S.L.P. stage on 10th November 1997 to the following effect:
“Delay condoned.
Issue notice for final disposal requiring the respondents to show cause why reference as asked for should not be made.”
4. We find that there is a dispute about the title as also regarding computation of appropriate compensation for acquiring the land in question. Hence, this is a fit case where the High Court should have allowed the writ petition and should have directed the Land Acquisition Officer to make reference under Section 18 read with Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. Only on this short ground, therefore, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and the Land Acquisition Officer is directed to make a reference, under Section 18 read with Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, to the appropriate court within eight weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order at his end.
5. Office to send a copy of this order to the Spl. Dy. Collec-tor, Land Acquisition Officer (Central), Hyderabad (A.P) for necessary action.
6. No costs.
