Smt. Tatina Vijaya Bharathi, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

SMT. TATINA VIJAYA BHARATHI,, W/O KASI VISWESWARA RAO, AGED 55 YEARS, HINDU, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O PARAKASARAOPALEM VILLAGE, NALLAJERLA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶16

THE ARBITRATOR L A AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT ELURU.

¶17

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY L A AND REVENUE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶18

THE TAHSILDAR, NALLAJERALA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI

2

VS,J

W.P.No.47426 of 2018

DISTRICT.

THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, NEW DELHI, REP.ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODARAVARI DISTRICT.

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of respondents in not paying compensation to the petitioner in pursuance Award bearing No. 33/2017, dated 12-10-2017 for land in Sy.No. 279/1A2 and Sy.No. 278/1B to an extent of Ac. 2-25 cents situated at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District which was acquired for the purpose of widening NH-167, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh State as illegal, irregular, irrational and violative of Provisions under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and offending Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to dispose of the application (ROC) filed by the petitioner, dated 26-11-2018 for enhancement (Award No.33/2017) of compensation regarding agricultural landed property admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 2.25 Cents, situated at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District in accordance with law, and pass

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶27

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 direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over the agricultural landed property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.2-25 Cents in Sy.No. 279/1A2 and Sy.No.278/1B to situate at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh State, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.SURESH KUMAR ROUTHU

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

3

VS,J

W.P.No.47426 of 2018

1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP)

¶35

2.M ANAND KUMAR

¶36

The Court made the following:

4

VS,J

W.P.No.47426 of 2018

ORDER:

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

¶42

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of respondents in not paying compensation to the petitioner in pursuance Award bearing No. 33/2017, dated 12-10-2017 for land in Sy.No. 279/1A2 and Sy.No. 278/1B to an extent of Ac. 2-25 cents situated at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District which was acquired for the purpose of widening NH-167, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh State as illegal, irregular, irrational and violative of Provisions under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and offending Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to dispose of the application (ROC) filed by the petitioner, dated 26-11-2018 for enhancement (Award No.33/2017) of compensation regarding agricultural landed property admeasuring to an extent of Ac. 2.25 Cents, situated at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District in accordance with law, and pass”

¶43

The petitioner claims to have purchased an agricultural land

¶44

admeasuring Acs.2.25 cents in Sy.No.279/1A2 and 278/1B situated at Nallajerala, Eluru, West Godavari District vide registered sale deed bearing document No.3657 of 2012 and ever since, the petitioner has

¶45

5

¶46

VS,J W.P.No.47426 of 2018

¶47

been in possession and enjoyment of the subject property by raising palm oil plantation.

¶48

While the matter stood thus, the respondents have issued a notification for acquisition of the subject land for the purpose of widening Gundugolanu-Kovvuru National highway No.16, vide notification No.1298(E), dated 13.02.2017. As the respondents have fixed the compensation in the award dated 25.07.2017 as Rs.51,06,959/- and failed to fix the value of the petitioner’s property as per existing market value, the petitioner filed an application under Section 64 of Land Acquisition Act, 2013 before the 2^nd respondent on 26.11.2018, seeking enhancement of the compensation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents, without paying any compensation to the petitioner pursuant to the award dated 25.07.2017 under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Resettlement Act, 2013 and without disposing of the application submitted by the petitioner dated 26.11.2018 under Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, are interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the subject property. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

¶49

The 5^th respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit admitting the facts as stated by the petitioner with regard to acquiring petitioner’s land. Further, respondent No.5 explained the procedure adopted by the

¶50

6

¶51

VS,J W.P.No.47426 of 2018

¶52

respondents after issuance of the land acquisition notification till payment of compensation to the land loser. It is further stated that according to the recitals of the award No.33/2017, dated 12.10.2017, in the remarks column of the statement showing calculation of compensation of Nallajerla village, EGK road S.H.107, award No.33/2017, it is mentioned that there exists a dispute between one Vellanki Subrahmanyam and the petitioner herein in O.S.Nos.230/2012, 140/2016 and 27/2013 pending in concerned Courts situated in West Godavari district. As such, the compensation was not paid to any person and the same is kept in reserve in the revenue account. Hence requested to dismiss the writ petition.

¶53

Heard Sri. Suresh Kumar Routhu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri. A. Laxminarayana, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

¶54

Perused the material available on record. The facts of the writ petition are not in dispute. Though respondent Nos.1 to 4 have not chosen to file counter affidavit, today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader has furnished a copy of instructions of the 3^rd respondent dated 01.07.2026, wherein it is stated that a title dispute with regard to subject property was raised by one Vellanki Subrahmanyam in O.S.No.140 of 2016 and O.S.No.138 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the XI Additional District Judge, West Godavari,

7

VS,J

W.P.No.47426 of 2018

Tadepalligudem against the petitioner herein and the said suits were dismissed and pursuant to the dismissal of the suits filed by said Vellanki Subrahmanyam, an appeal was preferred before this Court vide A.S.No.501 of 2025 and the same is pending adjudication. Due to pendency of title disputes, the compensation was deposited on the file of the Court of the XI Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Tadepalligudem under Section 3H(4) of National Highway Act, 1956 (Act 48 of 1956). Learned counsel for the petitioner admitted that civil suits were filed by one Vellanki Subrahmanyam against the petitioner, but, however has contended that the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 dated 26.11.2018 is still pending consideration before the 2^nd respondent.

¶59

Admittedly, there is a title dispute between the petitioner and

¶60

one Vellanki Subrahmanyam pertaining to the schedule property. It is also clear that challenging the dismissal of aforementioned suits, the said Vellanki Subrahmanyam filed an appeal before this Court vide A.S.No.501 of 2025, which is pending adjudication. Though compensation was awarded after acquiring the property in issue, the same was not paid because of the said title disputes between the petitioner and Vellanki Subrahmanyam; however, the same was deposited on the file of the Court

8

VS,J

W.P.No.47426 of 2018

of the XI Additional District Judge, West Godavari, Tadepalligudem under

¶65

Section 3H(4) of National Highway Act, 1956 (Act 48 of 1956).

¶66

In view of the same, instead of touching the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to furnish all the requisite documents proving her title over the subject land for payment of compensation, before the concerned authority and the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Furthermore, as the application submitted by the petitioner dated 26.11.2018 under Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 is still pending consideration, the 2^nd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the same within a period of three

¶67

(3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶68

Accordingly, with the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶69

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

¶70

_____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶71

08.07.2026 Gss

¶72

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes Reportable No

Smt. Tatina Vijaya Bharathi, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Tatina Vijaya Bharathi, 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

Mota Anjamma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

C. Venkata Narsi Reddy , Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kilari Gopal Rao Vs the State of A.P

G. Venkatapathi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Bestha Nagabhushanam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

E.Satish Kumar Vs The State of A.P.