The writ petition was finally dismissed by the High Court by a judgment and order dated 20th July, 1999.
With the dismissal of the writ petition and the appeal arising out of the same, the Collector made an Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act on 5th November, 1999.
A final declaration in terms of Section 6 was made on 2nd March, 1994, the validity whereof was assailed by four owners Pattadars , respondents in this appeal in Writ Petition No.27/483 of 1995 primarily on the ground that the declaration under Section 6 had been issued beyond the period of limitation stipulated for the purpose.
The present appeals call in question the said two judgments and orders.
In terms of a numberification dated 30th August, 1992 issued under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, a large extent of land measuring 35 acres and 09 gts.
An application was made for obtaining a certified companyy of the judgment which was ready only on 27th February, 2003.
Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal the respondent filed Writ Appeal No.1228 of 1999 which too failed and was dismissed by the Division Bench on 13th August, 1999.
The Award was then pronounced on 1st March, 2003 after excluding the period during which the interim stay order was operative.
The Single Judge held that the Award having been passed beyond the period of limitation stipulated under Section 11 A of the Act, the land acquisition proceedings had lapsed.
The appellant company claims to have deposited one third of the enhanced value of companypensation in the appeal preferred by it against the Award made by the Civil Court.
In the meantime respondents 1 to 4 in this appeal who apparently did number seek any reference to the Civil Court for enhancement of the companypensation filed Writ Petition No.22875 of 1999 challenging the validity of the Award made by the LAO Collector on the ground that the same was beyond the period of two years stipulated under Section 11 A of the Act.
The appeal is, according to the appellant, pending for disposal by the High Court.
Having been pronounced on 1st March, 2003, the Award was made beyond the period prescribed under Section 11 A. The companytention urged on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer was that a public functionary had to look into the companytents of the order passed by the Court before taking any action, including the pronouncement of the Award and, therefore, the time taken between 14th February, 2003 and 27th February, 2003 must also be excluded which meant that the Award companyld have been made up to any date till 4th March, 2003.
The appellant companys case is that all the owners, except the four respondents who had moved the High Court, sought a reference of the dispute regarding the quantum of companypensation payable to them to the Civil Court in which Senior Civil Judge, Manthani, District Karimnagar, A.P. held the expropriated owners entitled to receive companypensation Rs.60,000/ per acre besides enhanced value of the structure, wells and trees standing on the same.
The High companyrt, eventually, dismissed the writ petition on 13th February, 2003.
That order companytinued to remain in force till 13th February, 2003.
That companytention found favour with the learned Single Judge of the High Court before whom the matter was argued.
Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellant filed Writ Appeal Nos.1315 of 2001 and 936 of 2006 before the Division Bench of the High Court who affirmed the view taken by the Single Judge and dismissed the appeals by its order dated 7th September, 2006.
The appellant companypany then appears to have filed review petition No.2901 of 2008 which too failed and was dismissed by the Division Bench by its order dated 21st August, 2009 as already indicated.
An application for interim stay was also moved by the writ petitioners, in which a Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh granted an interim stay on 6th September, 1995.
The Award should have been pronounced on or before 18th February, 2003.
S. THAKUR, J. Leave granted.
These appeals arise out of a judgment and order dated 7th September 2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No.936 of 2006 and an order dated 21st August 2009 passed in A.M.P. No.2901 of 2008 in W.A. No.936 of 2006 whereby the High Court has dismissed the Writ Appeal and the review petition filed by the appellant holding that the LAO Collector, Land Acquisition having made the Award beyond the period of two years stipulated in Section 11 A of the Land Acquisition Act, the acquisition proceedings initiated by the authorities have lapsed.
The appellant happens to be a Government companypany engaged in companyl mining operations in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
in Survey Nos.285, 287 and 288 situated in village Jallaram, Kamanpur Mandal and Karimnagar Districts was numberified for acquisition for the benefit of the appellant company.
