ORDER :- Petitioner No.1 .vas assigned an extent of Acs.3.21 guntas of land in Survey No. 134/1 of Chinnagollapally Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The entire villages of Chinnagollapally, Ananthareddyguda, Galvaguda and Maqtha Bahadur Ali were affected on account of the establishment of International Airport at Shamshabad. Petitioner No.1, however, was not paid ex gratia on the ground that there is a dispute as to overlapping of land in Survey No.13411 with that of the land in Survey Nos.23 and 24 of Ananthareddyguda Village. The petitioners contend that from the date of assignment of the land, they are in possession and enjoyment of the same till the date of resumption and that there is absolutely no basis for the respondent in denying the ex gratia. 2. The respondent filed a counter affidavit. The fact that petitioner No.1 was assigned Acs.3.2l guntas of land in Survey No.13411 is admitted. The only reason for not paying ex gratia stated by the respondent is that there is overlapping between the lands in survey numbers of the two villages. 3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. 4. In cases of private patta lands, proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act were initiated, and ex gratia was paid for the assigned lands resumed by the Government, for the purpose of establishment of an Airport. The respondent does not dispute the fact that petitioner No.1 was assigned Acs.3.2l guntas of land in Survey No.134/l and that it was taken over from him. The so-called overlapping between the survey numbers of two different villages did not at all come in the way of the respondent in assigning the land to petitioner No.1. 5. Further, the dispute as to overlapping is not something, which the petitioners were under obligation to resolve. There cannot be any justification for the respondents in denying the ex gratia. 6. A Larger Bench of this Court held that payment of ex gratia is a legal obligation on the part of the Government and it cannot be treated as mere gratis. 7. There cannot be any justification for the respondents in denying the ex gratia. 6. A Larger Bench of this Court held that payment of ex gratia is a legal obligation on the part of the Government and it cannot be treated as mere gratis. 7. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to pay ex gratia to the petitioners for the land admeasuring Acs.3.21 guntas in Survey No.134/l of Chinnagollapally Village, Shamshabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District with interest at the rate of 12%-per-annum from the date on which the possession was taken till the date of payment. There shall be no order as to costs.