The High Court · 2025

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR STIAVILI AND HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA L.A.A.S.No.546 OF 2025 0 { JUDGMENT: (Pe. tl'Le Hotr'ble Si Justice Abhinaad KumN Shauili) When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is noticed that the issue raised in the present Appeal IS squarely covered by the common judgrnent, dated 29.04.2025, passed by this Court in L.A.A.S.No.57 of 2024 & batch and by following the aforesaid common judgrnent, the present Appeal also desen,es to be allowed.

2. Accordingly, the Appeal is aliowed following the aforesaid common judgment, dated 29.O4.2025, passed by this Court in L.A.A.S.No.57 of 2024 & batch, and the market value is enhanced by two more times (1+2) than the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Ofhcer with all consequential benehts. However, the appellant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period in preferring the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. \ To, SD/- M RAMANA KRISHNA, JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Senior Civil Judge at Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District. 2. fwo CCs to GP for Appeals, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

3. One CC to SRI PADMA REKHA RAVULA, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies M i I HIGH COURT DATED:1 110712025 :'! +DECREI] JUDGMENT LAAS.No.546 ol 2025 1 HES rA t 2 ?5 ,''nn zozo u

1116.rr'. '_ o i' 6t ALLOWING THE APPEAL WTTHOUT COSTS F< zsll>-t a HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND IruMAR ST{AYILI AND HON'BI-E SMT JUSTICE TIRUMAT-{ DEVI EA.DA L.A.A.S. Nos.57 81 an d124 0F 2024 COMMON JUDGMENT i (tr Ho,,bb J Bra Abhinand x.tD sbdaiti) When the mamers are taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the appellants had informed this Court that the issue raised in these Appeals is squarely covered by the judgment, dared

27.01.2025, passed by this Court in L.A.A.S.No.49 of 2024. l,earned counsel had further contended that L.A.A.S.No.49 of 2024 was filed by claimant No.26 in O.P.No.9l of 201,4, dared

03.10.2018 and the appellanrs herein are other claimants in O.P.No.91 of 201,4. Therefore, similar order be passed in these appeals also. karned counsel had further contended that LAAS No.49 of 2024 utas disposed of by relying on a Division Bench iudgment of this Court in L.A.A.S.No.125 of 2015 and batch, dated 27.09.2022, whereby the market value o[ the land acquired therein was enhanced by rwo more dmes than the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer with al.t consequenrial benefits, 2 i I howe ver, For the de lav period ln prefcrring the appeals, the claimants are not entitlcd For any interest

3. Learne<l counscl tlrr the appellants had further contended that the judgment, dated 27.09.2022 passcd in L.r\.A.S.No.125 of 2015 and batch was also confirmed by the Apex Court in S.L.P.(Civil)No.28925 of 2024, dated 17 09.2024. Therefore, the prescnt appeals can also be disposed o[ ir-r terms o[ the judgment, dated 27.01.2i)25 passed in t,.A.A.S.No.49 of 2024

5. l,earned Government Pleader appearing for the 1., respondent-Land Acquisition Officer had contended rhat the purpose <.r[ acquiring lands of appellants is for Ryalampadu Balancing Reservc,rr under Jawahar Lift Irrigation Project and Priyadarshi Jurala Project and G.O.Ms.No.234, dared 15.10.1993 and G.O.Ms.No.291, dated 05.08.1982 are not applicable to the said irrisauon projects. Therefore, all the appeals are liable to be dis missed. 3 4 Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is o[ the view that the Division Bench of this Court in L.A.A.S.No.2 of 2016, dared 27.09.2022 and L.A.A.S.No.4 of 2016, dated 1.5.09.2022 held that the said G.Os. are applicable for all the Irrigauon Projects, and though the said G.Os. were issued specifically for Srisailam Hldro Power Projects. L.A.A.S.No.125 of 2015 and batch, dated 27.09.2022 and L.A.A.S.N o.4 of 2016, dared 15.09.2022 were allowed and the market value was enhanced by two more times than the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Aggrieved by the order, dated

27.09.2022, in L.A.A.S.No.125 of 201,5 and batch, the State has carried the matter to the Apex Court by filing S.L.P.(Civil).No. 28925 of 2024 and the Apex Courr uidc order, dated 17.09.2024, confirmed the order passed by the Division Bench of this court in L.A.A.S.No.125 of 201.5 and batch. Therefore, the present appeals can also be disposed o[ in terms of the iudgment, dated

27.09.2022, passed in L.A.A.S.No.125 of 2075 and batch 4 6'

5. Accordinglv, all thc appeals are allowed by followrng the judgment, (lared 2l .09 .2022, passed in L.A.A.S.No .125 of 2015 and batch, and thc markct value is cnhanced bv two more times (1 +2) than thc value fixed br, thc I-and Acquisidon Officer with all consequenttal bcnefi ts. I{owever, the appellants are not entided for interest for the delay period in preferring the appeals. There shall be no order as to costs N{isccllaneous Petiuons, if any, pending in these appeals shall stand closccl JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SIIAVILI JUSTICE TIRUMAI.A DEVI EADA l)a tc: 29.0,1 2025 Itcqrrrq to anno copr otrhe ;udurncnr drrcd 27 09.202i1 ln I-\AS \,, ll: (,42r)15. ill ( )l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA L.A.A.S. NO. 546 0F 2025 Between: P.Venkataiah, S/o. P.Naganna, Aged about 49 years, Occ. Agricuiture, Rio. Kanayapally Village of Kothakota Mandal Wanaparthy District, ...AppellanU Claimant AND The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Rajeev Lift lrrigation Scheme, Phase-ll, Pebbair, Mahaboobnagar District, Presently Wanaparthy District ...RespondenU Respondent Appeal Under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act agg rieved by the Order and Decree dated 21-04-2014 in L.A.O.P.No. 14 ot 2013 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy, Mahaboobnagar District . This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal' the order and Decree of the Lower court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. PADMA REKHA RAVULA, Advocate for the Appellant and of GP for Appeals for the Respondent. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

1. That the appeal be and hereby is ailowed foilowing the common judgment dated 29-04-2025, passed by this Court in LA.A.S.No. SZ ot 2024 & batch and the Market varue is enhanced by two more times (1+2) than the varue fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer with all consequential benefits;

2. That the apperrant be and hereby rs not entiiled to braim interest for the deray period of 3928 days in preferring the appeal as specifically ordered by this Court while condoning the delay; and

3. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. M RAMANA KRISHNA, JOINT REGIST RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Serior Civil Judge at Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District 2. Two CD Copies Kul W I I HIGH COURT DATED:1110712025 DECREE LAAS.No.546 of 2O2S ALLOWING THE APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS J-<r. {slaf r-e