LAAS/15/2023 of THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR Vs THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER on 9 April 2026

1. THE SPECIAL OFFICER) UN SRIKAKULAM.

1. THE EXECU PROJECT (CO II, HIRAMAND

2. ANDHAVARAP AGED 48 YEA SRIKAKULAM

3. ANDHAVARAP MURTHY, A HIRAMANDALA

4. ANDHAVARAP KORADA VIL DISTRICT. HE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) DAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDR AND RABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GE QUISITION APPEAL SUIT No.15 OF 2 L DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (LAND A NIT -1 B.R.R. VAMSADHARA . ...A AND UTIVE ENGINEER, B.R.R. VA ONSTRUCTION DIVISION), STAGE II DALAM. PU VENKATA RAMANA MURTHY, ARS, KORADA VILLAGE, HIRAMAN DISTRICT. PU SIVA KUMAR, S/O A.V.SATYA AGED

YEARS, KORADA AM (M), SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. PU DHANUNJAYA, S/O ABBAI, AGED LLAGE, HIRAMANDALAM (M), S DESH

RANATH ROY EDELA

CQUISITION PROJECT, APPELLANT AMSADHARA I OF PHASE- S/O ABBAI, NDALAM (M), ANARAYANA VILLAGE, D 50 YEARS, RIKAKULAM

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant:

1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP) Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. S RAM BABU

2. The Court made the following:

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No.15 of 2023 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

The Award dated 26.09.2022 passed in L.A.O.P.No.9 of 2019 on the file of the Court of the Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Center and Resettlement Authority, Visakhapatnam Region, Visakhapatnam, whereby the compensation that was assessed for the land acquired of respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein was enhanced at the rate of Rs.1,800/- per square yard, is under challenge in this appeal preferred by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition Officer), Unit-1 of B.R.R. Vamsadhara Project, Srikakulam, who is the Referring Officer.

2. Heard learned Special Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General appearing for the appellant and Mr. Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Ram Babu, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. None appeared for respondent No.1-official respondent.

3. The State has acquired a huge extent of land of various owners for the public purpose of constructing a reservoir under B.R.R. Vamsadhara Project, Phase-II of Stage II in Korada Village, Hiramandalam Mandal, Srikakulam District. The land in an extent of Ac.1.57 cents owned by respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein is part of the said acquired land. After issuing Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) and after following the procedure prescribed under the Act, the said land of Ac.1.57 cents of respondent Nos.2 to 4 was acquired by the State and possession of the said land was also taken by the State. The Land Acquisition Officer

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

has fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.5.00 Lakhs per acre. The compensation for the land was assessed on acreage basis considering the land that was acquired as an agricultural land. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are aggrieved by the fixation of the said compensation for their land on acreage basis. According to them, the land in question was being used for non-agricultural purpose and they were paying Non- Agricultural Land Assessment (NALA) tax to the Government and they were using the said land for commercial purpose and, as such, the compensation is to be assessed on yardage basis. So, they did not accept the compensation that has been fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Therefore, a reference was made by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition Officer), Unit-1 of B.R.R. Vamsadhara Project, Srikakulam, under Section 64(1) r/w Section 77(2) of the Act, on the requisition made by the 1st respondent – Executive Engineer of B.R.R. Vamsadhara Project Construction Division, as per his letter dated 20.07.2005 relating to the land acquired of respondent Nos.2 to 4 situated in Korada Village of Hiramandalam Mandal, Srikakulam District.

4. The said reference came up for consideration before the Court of the Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation Center and Resettlement Authority, Visakhapatnam Region, Visakhapatnam. Before the said Court, it has been contended by the Special Deputy Collector/Land Acquisition Officer that since the land acquired is an agricultural land and since huge extent of land was acquired, computation of compensation shall be made on acreage basis and not on yardage basis. But, it is not disputed before the Court below that the land in question, which was acquired from respondent Nos.2 to 4, was being used for non-agricultural purpose and that they have been paying NALA tax and huge structures like kaIyana mandapams, cinema halls

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

etc. are existing on the said land and in the vicinity of the said land. Considering the said fact and also considering the report of the District Collector, Srikakulam, submitted to the Secretary to the Government, Irrigation & CAD Department, on the basis of the report submitted by the Land Acquisition Officer after physical verification of the land by the then Revenue Divisional Officer, wherein it is clearly stated that the lands of respondent Nos.2 to 4 along with other lands under acquisition are being used for non-agricultural purpose and that kalyana mandapams, cinema halls, lodges etc. are existing on the said lands and in the vicinity of the said lands, the Court below found fault with the Land Acquisition Officer in assessing the compensation for the lands on acreage basis and it opined that the compensation has to be fixed on yardage basis. Accordingly, after taking into consideration the relevant material on record, the Court below has fixed the compensation on yardage basis at the rate of Rs.1,800/- per square yard and directed the concerned authorities to pay the compensation accordingly to respondent Nos.2 to 4 for the land that was acquired in an extent of Ac.1.57 cents.

5. We absolutely do not find any legal flaw or infirmity in the impugned order of the Court below. We have gone through the report dated 22.10.2009 submitted by the District Collector, Srikakulam, to the Secretary to the Government, Irrigation & CAD Department, which was marked as Ex.A9. In his report, the District Collector has clearly stated that the then Revenue Divisional Officer personally inspected the lands acquired and reported that the said lands are located on AB Road of Hiramandalam and he found cinema theatres, rice mills, kalyana mandapams, lodges and shopping complexes existing on the said lands. It is further stated that they are not agricultural lands and they are being used for non-agricultural purpose by paying NALA from

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

1987 onwards. As it is a crucial finding which is very much essential to resolve the controversy involved in this lis, the same is extracted hereunder for better appreciation:

“The then Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda personally inspected the above lands covered by writ petitions and reported that the lands are located on AB road of Hiramandalam and found Cinema Theatres, Rice Mills, Kalyanamandapam, lodges and shopping complexes are fixing on the lands. They are not agricultural lands. They are being used for non-agricultural purpose by paying NALA from 1987 onwards.”

6. Ultimately, in his report, it is stated that if the compensation is fixed on yardage basis, the total award amount would be in the range of Rs.3,36,83,080/-.

7. Therefore, when admittedly, the lands that are acquired are being used for non-agricultural purpose by paying NALA tax from the year 1987 onwards and when the said lands are being used for commercial purpose, assessing the compensation on acreage basis treating the lands as agricultural lands would certainly result into gross injustice to the owners of the land. The compensation is to be fixed by treating the lands as non-agricultural lands, as the Government accepted NALA tax from the owners of the land and permitted them to use the said lands for non-agricultural/commercial purpose, and the compensation is to be accordingly paid to them. When cinema theatres, rice mills, kalyana mandapams, lodges and shopping complexes are existing on the said lands, certainly it would fetch more income and it would fetch more value for the said lands. Therefore, when the private lands of citizens are acquired for public purpose, fair and reasonable compensation commensurate with the usage of the said lands has to be paid to the owners of the land, who are deprived of their lands on account of acquisition of their lands for public purpose. Taking into consideration all these relevant factors and the

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

evidence on record, the Court below has arrived at a right conclusion and held that the compensation is to be fixed on yardage basis and accordingly, fixed a fair and reasonable compensation of Rs.1,800/- per square yard. It is not exorbitant and it is reasonable. The respondent Nos.2 to 4, who are owners of the land, cannot be denied just, fair and reasonable compensation on the ground urged by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellant now that if the compensation is paid on yardage basis to respondent Nos.2 to 4 that there is a possibility of the other owners also to claim compensation on yardage basis, in which event a huge amount is to be incurred by the State for the purpose of paying compensation. The said contention cannot be a valid ground to reject the claim of respondent Nos.2 to 4, which is otherwise found to be valid and reasonable.

8. Therefore, we do not find any valid legal ground emanating from the record warranting interference with the impugned order of the Court below. The impugned order is perfectly sustainable under law and it is not liable to be set aside.

9. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed, affirming the order of the Court below.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

______________________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date:10.04.2026 IBL

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

L.A.A.S.No.15 of 2023

Dt: 10.04.2026 IBL