Neelamsetty Govinda Vs the Principal Secretary

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly respondents 2 to 4 in not considering petitioner's objections dated 05.06.2023, submitted to refer the dispute to competent authority under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettleme Act, 2013 for determination of true market value and for fixing fair compensation other benefits for his acquired land of Ac. 0.24 Cents covered by Survey No 161-1 and 161-2A of Puripenta Revenue

¶18

2

¶19

Village in Gajapathi Nagaram Mandal Vizianagaram District, pursuant to Award No.11/2022, dated 06.02.2023 issued by 3rd respondent, as illegal, irregular, irrational and voilative of provisions of the said statute and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequely direct the respondents to refer the dispute to the competent authority under Section 64 of the said statute for determination of true market value, compensation, rehabilitation, d resettlement benefits for petitioner's said acquired land and pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.SUDHANAGUNTA SWETHA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

3

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

¶28

…pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly respondents 2 to 4 in not considering petitioner’s objections dated 05.06.2023, submitted to refer the dispute to competent authority under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for determination of true market value and for fixing fair compensation and other benefits for his acquired land of Ac.0.24 Cents covered by Survey No.161-1A and 161-2A of Puripenta Revenue Village in Gajapathi Nagaram Mandal of Vizianagaram District, pursuant to Award No.11/2022, dated 06.02.l2023, issued by the 3^rd respondent, as illegal, irregular, irrational and violative of provisions of the said statute and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to refer the dispute to the competent authority under Section 64 of the said statute for determination of true market value, compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement benefits for petitioner’s said acquired land and pass such other order or orders……

¶29

The short grievance of the Writ Petitioner is that the respondents have acquired a piece of land to an extent of Ac.0-24 cents covered by Sy.No.161-1A and 161-2A of Puripenta Revenue Village in Gajapathi Nagaram Mandal of Vizianagaram District, for the purpose of construction of 3^rd Railway Line between Vizianagaram and Sambalpur (Titlagarh) Section of East Cost Railway in Waltair Division and passed an award on 06.02.2023 vide Award No.11/2022, and granted meager compensation for

¶30

the lands acquired. The petitioner who is dissatisfied in granting low compensation has submitted objections dated 08.05.2023 to the

¶31

4

¶32

respondents No.2 and 3 through Spandana Programme requesting to refer the award to the authority under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short hereinafter referred to as the Act).

¶33

Despite the said objections made by the petitioner, the respondents have not referred the award No.11/2022 to the Authority. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to refer the award No.11/2022 to the Authority under Section 64 of the Act.

¶34

For effective disposal of the Writ Petition, the relevant portion of Section 64 of the Act is hereby extracted:

¶35

Section 64 of the Act refers thus: (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, to the person to whom it is payable, the rights of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Chapters V and VI or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested:

¶36

Provided that the Collector shall, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of application, make a reference to the appropriate Authority.

¶37

5

¶38

The Section spells out that when an objection is made as to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation invariably the District Collector has to refer the award to the appropriate authority under the aforesaid section.

¶39

Admittedly, the petitioner herein made application on 08.05.2023 in the Spandana Programme. Despite lapse of three years, the respondents have not filed counter. Therefore, in the absence of the counter affidavit, the Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the 2^nd respondent to refer the award No.11 of 2023, dated 22.06.2023 to the authority under Section 64 of the Act. And it is needles to state that the 2^nd respondent shall complete the process within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶40