Allowed¶85

Eluri Sarojanamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Land Acquisition – Polavaram Irrigation Project

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Jul 2026WP/10972/2018

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Polavaram Irrigation Project; land acquisition compensation recovery; RFCTLARR Act 2013; Section 51 competent authority; status quo on disbursement; Articles 14, 21, 300-A; Article 226 mandamus; West Godavari; Kukunoor; Sridharaveleu/S.No.37; Dasari Jogaiah; award Roc.No.A/82/2016 dated 24.03.2017; Rs.71,94,426 repayment by demand draft; notices dated 17.02.2018 and No.A/98/2016 dated 21.03.2018; W.P.Nos.39038/2016, 12119, 12154, 12169 of 2017; Justice V. Sujatha; W.P.No.10972 of 2018.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and notice bearing No.A/98/2016 dated 21.03.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent set aside; writ petition allowed; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed. ¶85

Eluri Sarojanamma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶85

Issue for consideration

Whether the 2nd respondent could validly issue notices dated 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018 directing the petitioners to repay the compensation of Rs.71,94,426/- already credited to their bank account on 04.05.2017, when the common order dated 01.08.2017 had merely granted liberty to approach the competent authority under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act and directed status quo on disbursement, and no competent-authority determination of rights existed. +1 more

¶80

Court's answer

Until the rights of the parties, including the 4th respondent claiming through late Dasari Jogaiah, are determined by the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act pursuant to the common order dated 01.08.2017, the respondents cannot direct the petitioners to repay the compensation amount already credited to their bank account on 04.05.2017.

¶80

Ratio / Principle

In the absence of any order from the competent authority determining the right of the parties to receive compensation, and the record being silent on whether such authority was even approached, the 2nd respondent ought not to have issued the impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018 directing repayment.

¶80

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land Acquisition – Polavaram Irrigation Project – Recovery of compensation already disbursed. Writ petition under Article 226 by two landowners whose lands (Acs.6.37 cents, S.No.37, Sridharaveleu village, Kukunoor mandal, West Godavari district) were acquired for the Polavaram Project, challenging notices dated 17.02.2018 and No.A/98/2016 dated 21.03.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent (LAO & Sub-Collector, Kukunoor) demanding repayment of Rs.71,94,426/- awarded under Roc.No.A/82/2016 dated 24.03.2017 and credited to their bank account on 04.05.2017. Held: the common order dated 01.08.2017 in W.P.Nos.12119, 12154 and 12169 of 2017 (Dasari Jogaiah) merely granted liberty to approach the competent authority under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act and imposed status quo on disbursement; it did not direct recovery; the record was silent on any determination of rights by the competent authority; until such determination the respondents cannot direct repayment of compensation already credited. Notices set aside; writ petition allowed; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

[3333]

¶2

APHC010248922018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 10972/2018

¶9

Between:

¶10

ELURI SAROJANAMMA, W/O ELURI RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 70 YRS. R/O SREEDHARAVELERU VILLAGE, KUKUNOOR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶11

RAVULAPATI MADHAVI, W/O SARATH, AGED ABOUT 400 YRS. R/O SREEDHARAVELERU VILLAGE, KUKUNOOR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶12

...PETITIONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT (POLAVARAM PROJECT), GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND SUB COLLECTOR, KUKUNOOR, WEST GODAVRI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶16

THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, POLAVARAM PROJECT, KUKUNOOR, WEST GODAVRI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

pleased to to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents herein not to give effect to the same and pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶25

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the petitioner as Respondent No. 4 in W.P.No. 10972 of 2018 and pass

¶27

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to Permit the petitioners to file Additional affidavit in the WP No.10972 of 2018 and pass

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶30

1.P PRABHAKAR RAO

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP)

¶36

2.GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)

¶37

The Court made the following:

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

ORDER:

This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer:

¶43

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the Notice issued by the 2nd respondent which was received by the petitioners in the last week of February 2018 and also Notice No.A/98/2016 dt. 21-3-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents herein not to give effect to the same and pass…”

¶44

The petitioners’ lands admeasuring Acs.6.37 cents situated in

¶45

S.No.37 of Sridharaveleu village, Kukunoor mandal, West Godavari district were acquired by the Government due to submergence under Polavaram Irrigation Project. While the respondent authorities were initiating steps to award compensation to the petitioners, one Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.39038 of 2016 before this Court questioning the award proceedings; the said writ petition was disposed of on 14.03.2017 directing the petitioners and the said Dasari Jogaiah to raise all objections before the 2^nd respondent. However, as the said Dasari Jogaiah did not raise any objection before the 2^nd respondent, after conducting due

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

enquiry and after considering the evidence on record, the 2^nd respondent passed an award vide Roc.No.A/82/2016, dated 24.03.2017 in respect of the petitioners’ lands and thereafter, the 2^nd respondent has also deposited the compensation amount into the petitioners’ individual bank accounts.

¶50

Thereafter, the said Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.12119 of 2017 before this Court questioning the award dated 24.03.2017, which was disposed of along with W.P.No.12154 and 12169 of 2017 by way of a common order dated 01.08.2017, wherein, this Court observed as under:

¶51

“…However, it came to light that though this Court granted an order of status quo, in W.P.No.12169 of 2017 the amount was already disbursed, whereas in other two writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.12119 and 12154 of 2017 the amount was not disbursed.

¶52

If that is so, liberty is given to the petitioners to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of the petitioners and the respondents 6 and 7 inter se and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law determining the right to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government. It is needless to observe that the respondents 2 and 3 shall send the record to the competent authority for determination and the competent authority shall dispose of the claims in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, giving due opportunity to the parties. Till the determination of the claims by the competent

¶53

¶54

VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018

¶55

authority, there shall be status quo with regard to disbursement of the amount covered by the awards…”

¶56

The case of the petitioners is that by the time this Court has passed the said common order i.e., on 01.08.2017, compensation amounts were already disbursed to the petitioners account in the month of March, 2017. While the matter stood thus, the 2^nd respondent, issued a notice on 17.02.2018 directing the petitioners to repay the compensation amount received by them as if it is directed by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Immediately, the petitioners submitted an explanation on 26.02.2018 stating that this Court has never directed the respondent authorities to recover the compensation paid to the petitioners pursuant to the award dated 24.03.2017 and as such, requested to withdraw the said notice. In spite of submitting an explanation to the show cause notice dated 17.02.2018, the 2^nd respondent has issued the impugned notice dated 21.03.2018 on the same grounds, aggrieved by which, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

¶57

When the writ petition came up for admission on 03.04.2018, this Court granted stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notices issued by the 2^nd respondent on 17.02.2018 and also the notice bearing No.A/98/2016, dated 21.03.2018 pending disposal of the writ petition.

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

The 4^th respondent, who is the son of late Dasari Jogaiah filed

¶62

a counter affidavit duly admitting the facts as stated by the petitioner and strenuously contended that the 2^nd respondent has issued the impugned notices by scrupulously following the direction issued by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition.

¶63

Heard Sri. P. Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri. D. Srinivas, learned counsel for the 4^th respondent.

¶64

Perused the entire material available on record. It can be seen

¶65

that the subject lands, allegedly belonging to the petitioners, were acquired by the 2^nd respondent for the purpose of developing Polavaram Irrigation Project and while the respondent authorities were initiating steps to pay compensation to the petitioners herein, one Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.39038 of 2016 before this Court questioning the said action of the respondent authorities, wherein this Court passed a final order on 14.03.2017, directing the petitioners herein as well as the said Dasari Jogaiah to raise objections before the 2^nd respondent herein. Pursuant to the said order, as the said Dasari Jogaiah failed to raise any objection, the

¶66

2^nd respondent, considering the documents submitted by the petitioners,

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

passed an award vide Roc.No.A/82/2016, dated 24.03.2017 holding that the petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.71,94,426/-.

¶71

Subsequently, in the month of April, 2017, the said Dasari Jogaiah approached this Court by filing W.P.No.12119 of 2017 seeking a direction to the respondent authorities not to release the compensation amount in favour of the petitioners herein or any third parties. The said writ petition was heard by this Court along with W.P.Nos.12154 and 12169 of 2017 and a common order was passed on 01.08.2017, granting liberty to the petitioners therein to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of all the parties therein and the competent authority was directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, determining the right to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government. Furthermore, the Court granted status quo with regard to disbursement of the amount covered by the awards, till determination of claims by the competent authority. It is to be noted that in the said common order, this Court has specifically observed that in W.P.No.12169 of 2017, the amounts were disbursed to the concerned, but whereas in two other writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.12154 and 12119 of 2017, the amounts were not disbursed.

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

The present impugned notices were issued to the petitioners on 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018, with a direction to repay the amount of Rs.71,94,426/- received by them as compensation, to the Sub-Collector, Kukunoor by demand draft. It is the case of the petitioners that by the time the common order dated 01.08.2017 was passed by this Court granting status quo with regard to disbursement of amounts covered under the respective awards, the amount of Rs.71,94,426/- was already credited in the petitioners’ bank account. In support of the same, the petitioners filed an additional affidavit enclosing the transaction statement of the petitioners’ bank account bearing No.52167679154 of State Bank of India, Burgampahad, Khammam district. A perusal of the same would go to show that Rs.71,94,426/- was credited to the petitioners’ bank account on 04.05.2017, which is admittedly before passing of the common order dated 01.08.2017.

¶76

In such a case, when this Court has specifically directed the Dasari Jogaiah and others to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act for determining the rights of the parties and further directed the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law determining the right of the parties to receive compensation for the lands acquired by the Government, the 2^nd respondent, in the absence of any order from the

VS,J

W.P.No.10972 of 2018

competent authority determining the right of the parties to receive compensation, ought not to have issued the impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018 directing the petitioners to repay the amount credited in their bank account on 04.05.2017. Moreover, the entire record is silent as to whether the 4^th respondent has approached the competent authority and whether the competent authority has determined the right of either of the parties to receive compensation for the acquisition of the lands in question, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in the common order dated 01.08.2017. Merely because this Court has granted status quo with regard to disbursement of the amounts covered by the award till determination of the claims by the competent authority, the 2^nd respondent cannot issue the impugned notices without any basis. It is pertinent to observe that amounts were already credited in the petitioners’ account on 04.05.2017, but, whereas, a common order was passed by this Court on 01.08.2017, which is subsequent to disbursement of the amounts. In such a case, until the rights of the 4^th respondent are determined by the competent authority, the respondents cannot direct the petitioners to repay the compensation amount already credited to their bank account.

¶81

In view of the above facts and circumstances, this writ petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned notices dated 17.02.2018 and

¶82

¶83

VS,J W.P.No.10972 of 2018

¶84

the notice bearing No.A/98/2016, dated 21.03.2018 issued by the 2^nd respondent are hereby set-aside.

¶85

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶86

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed.

¶87

_____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶88

15.07.2026 Gss

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Notices dated 17.02.2018 and Notice No.A/98/2016 dated 21.03.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent directing the petitioners to repay the compensation amount received by them, payable to the Sub-Collector, Kukunoor by demand draft.¶75
2nd respondent - Land Acquisition Officer and Sub Collector, Kukunoor · 17.02.2018 and 21.03.2018
Prior proceeding
Petitioners' lands admeasuring Acs.6.37 cents in S.No.37 of Sridharaveleu village, Kukunoor mandal, West Godavari district were acquired due to submergence under the Polavaram Irrigation Project.¶44
Prior proceeding
Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.39038 of 2016 questioning the award proceedings; it was disposed of on 14.03.2017, directing the petitioners and Dasari Jogaiah to raise objections before the 2nd respondent.¶45
Prior proceeding
After enquiry, the 2nd respondent passed award Roc.No.A/82/2016 dated 24.03.2017 holding the petitioners entitled to compensation.¶70
Prior proceeding
The compensation amount was deposited into the petitioners' individual bank accounts.¶49
Prior proceeding
Dasari Jogaiah filed W.P.No.12119 of 2017 questioning the award dated 24.03.2017; it was disposed of along with W.P.Nos.12154 and 12169 of 2017 by a common order dated 01.08.2017.¶50
Prior proceeding
By the common order dated 01.08.2017, liberty was given to the petitioners therein to approach the competent authority constituted under Section 51 of the Land Acquisition Act to determine inter se rights to compensation.¶52
Prior proceeding
Till determination of claims by the competent authority, the common order directed status quo with regard to disbursement of amounts covered by the awards.¶55
Prior proceeding
Petitioners submitted an explanation on 26.02.2018 to the show cause notice dated 17.02.2018, stating the Court never directed recovery of compensation paid pursuant to the award dated 24.03.2017.¶56
Prior proceeding
On admission on 03.04.2018, this Court granted stay of further proceedings pursuant to the 2nd respondent's notice of 17.02.2018 pending disposal of the writ petition.¶57
Prior proceeding
Fourth respondent (son of late Dasari Jogaiah) filed counter affidavit admitting the petitioners' facts and contending the 2nd respondent issued the impugned notices following the common order dated 01.08.2017.¶62
Prior proceeding
Petitioners filed an additional affidavit enclosing their SBI bank transaction statement showing Rs.71,94,426/- was credited to their account on 04.05.2017, before the common order dated 01.08.2017.¶75

Eluri Sarojanamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eluri Sarojanamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadimeti Satyabhavani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Ap.

B. Balaji Singh, Vs The Regional Manager

Md. D. lqbal Hussain, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Bollu Nagabhusanam Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Tukaram Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh