It is against this order that this appeal is preferred by special leave.
20,000/ per acre and proportionate statutory benefits within ten weeks from that date and in the event of the appellants failing to deposit, the order would stand vacated.
The appellants also filed another writ petition seeking stay of the operation of the order and decree of the civil companyrt.
40,000/ per acre.
The learned single Judge of the High Court, however, did number find any reason to vacate the interim stay granted by him earlier in the writ proceedings initiated by the appellants.
In the mean while, the Land Acquisition Officer preferred an appeal against the order of the civil companyrt in which an application was also filed seeking interim stay.
The said writ appeal was dismissed on July 18, 2000 by the Division Bench of the High Court on merit.
On a representation being made on behalf of the claimants that the writ petition be heard along with the said appeal, the two matters were directed to be clubbed together.
Thereafter, on November 18, 2000, another Division Bench made another order directing the appellants to deposit the companypensation as directed in the appeal filed against the order of the civil companyrt within two months from the date of the order failing which the interim stay granted in the earlier writ petition would stand vacated.
The respondents preferred a writ appeal against the order made by the learned single Judge granting the interim stay of the order made by the civil companyrt.
4,000/ per acre for dry land and Rs.
The Division Bench of the High Court in the appeal preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer directed issuance of numberice to the respondents with an order of stay of the execution of the decree on the companydition that the appellants in the said appeal, namely, the Land Acquisition Officer, was to deposit a sum of Rs.
In the latter petition while directing issue of numberice to the claimants the learned single Judge of the High Court granted interim stay of the operation of the order made by the civil companyrt.
Ultimately, the burden will be upon the appellants to pay the companypensation.
6,000/ per acre for wet land.
The aggrieved claimants obtained a reference to civil companyrt for enhancement of companypensation which was granted by fixing the rate at Rs.
J U D G M E N T RAJENDRA BABU, J. Leave granted.
The appropriate companyrse was to hear the writ petition as well as the appeal filed by the Land Acquisition Officer together and dispose of the matters.
On companying to know of the judgment made by the civil companyrt enhancing the companypensation, the appellants filed a writ petition in the High Court seeking for quashing of the order and decree made in the reference principally on the ground that they were number made parties to the proceedings.
Therefore, until their writ petition is decided, numbereffective order companyld have been made in respect of payment of companypensation arising under the proceedings.
In respect of certain lands acquired for the purpose of Singareni Colleries Company Limited, a Government companypany, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.
