G.Yethirajulu., J. - (1.)These review petitions are filed by the Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer), Anantapur (LAO) praying to review the common order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 27-10-1998 delivered in A.S.No.3392 of 1992 preferred against the order of the Principal Sub-Court, Anantapur in O.P.No.407 of 1987 dated 27-3-1992 on a reference made by the LAO under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act' for brevity) at the request of the owners of the lands having regard to the acquisition of an extent of Ac.95-13 cents land vide Award No.1/86 dated 31-1-1986 passed by him.
(2.)The LAO acquired the land, which is situated in Anantapur Municipality, for construction of houses for lower and middle-income group people by the A.P. Housing Board. The land belongs to 427 owners. The District Collector, Anantapur issued Section 4 (1) notification on 12-3-1980 and Section 6 (1) notification was published on 21-3-1980. The LAO in his award dated 31-1-1986 fixed the market value of the land @ Rs.900/- per Cent with consequential benefits like additional market value, solatium, interest on the amount etc. On protest made by the owners of the lands, in the year 1987 the LAO referred the matters to the Principal Sub-Court, Anantapur under Section 18 of the Act.The reference court decided some matters by enhancing the compensation from Rs.900/- to Rs.1500/- per Cent. The remaining matters were settled in Lok Adalat by mutual consent and in the year 1995 the owners of the lands received consolidated compensation of Rs.1850/- per Cent.
(3.)The LAO preferred the appeals before this High Court against the order of the reference court and a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 27-10-1998 disposed of 76 out of 106 appeals reducing the market value from Rs.1500/- to Rs.1400/- per Cent.The LAO now filed these review petitions with the following contentions:
(i) There is error apparent on the face of the judgment of the Division Bench since the Bench did not give any deduction towards developmental charges by making deduction at least 50% of the market value towards developmental activity, though the Hon'ble Bench gave deductions for developmental charges in other cases. (ii) The Bench erred in relying on sales of small extents of lands as comparable sales for arriving at the market value of a huge extent of land acquired under the above proceedings. (iii) The review petitioner could not bring to the notice of the Division Bench about the respondents receiving a sum of Rs.1850/- per Cent as per the Lok Adalat, in addition to Rs.1641/-, which was already granted under the Award and that re-fixing the market value @ Rs.1400/- per Cent is unjust and excessive. (iv) Though the Division Bench worked out the total compensation at Rs.1,35,150/- per acre, it committed error in rounding off the compensation amount to Rs.1,40,000/- per acre by adding Rs.4,850/- without any basis on the simple reason of rounding off the compensation amount.