ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent-Corporation in unauthorizedly acquiring the land of the petitioner admeasuring 623 Sy.yards in premises bearing No.1-7-137 situated at CSITA Wesley College, Prenderghast Road, Secunderabad, for the purpose of road widening and not paying the compensation amount under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as illegal and arbitrary and sought to declare that the provisions contained under Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, are applicable to the land in question. 2. Sri J. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the subject land was acquired by the respondent-Corporation for the purpose of road widening with the consent of the petitioner, but the respondents have not extended the benefits for which the petitioner is entitled to in respect thereof. He further submits that the petitioner is running a school in the remaining extent of land in question and therefore, the question of making any construction in the remaining extent of land does not arise. It is further submitted that though the petitioner is entitled to the concessions in terms of G.O.Ms.No.483 dated 24.08.1998, none of the benefits was extended to the petitioner. 3. Respondent-Corporation filed a counter-affidavit, dated 29.03.2022, stating that the land belonging to the petitioner is not at all acquired by the respondent-Corporation and no documents are filed by the petitioner to show that its land was acquired for road widening. However, respondent No.1 filed another counter-affidavit, dated 17.10.2023 admitting about acquisition of subject land with the consent of the petitioner. 4. A perusal of the material available on record, especially, the letter dated 16.12.1999 issued by the Additional City Planner, Town Planning Section, Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, Secunderabad Zone, shows that the respondent-Corporation sought consent of the petitioner for taking over the said extent of land for the purpose of road widening by offering to pay the compensation in respect of the affected structures and to extend the concessions as prescribed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998. 5. As it is admitted that subject land admeasuring 623.55 Sq.yards was acquired by the respondent-Corporation with the consent of the petitioner by offering to extend the concessions in terms of G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998. 5. As it is admitted that subject land admeasuring 623.55 Sq.yards was acquired by the respondent-Corporation with the consent of the petitioner by offering to extend the concessions in terms of G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998. Thus, there is no dispute that the petitioner is entitled for the concessions as provided under G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998. The fact remains that as on date the concessions extended by the respondent-Corporation were not availed of by the petitioner. 6. Further, it is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998 was modified by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.168, dated 07.04.2012 and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the benefits under the said G.O.Ms.No.168, dated 07.04.2012. 7. Taking into consideration the fact that the land of the petitioner was acquired as early as in the year 1999 and the petitioner could not avail the concessions that were sought to be extended to it under G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998 as the petitioner is never intended to make any construction in the remaining extent of land. The petitioner cannot be denied the benefits under G.O.Ms.No.168 in respect of the land that was acquired from the petitioner as early as in the year 1999. The respondent-Corporation having acquired the land belonging to the petitioner is under obligation to compensate the petitioner either in terms of compensation or in terms of the concessions for which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to. But, the petitioner was neither paid compensation nor given any concessions in respect of the acquired land. 8. Admittedly, G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24.08.1998 was modified vide G.O.Ms.No.168, dated 07.04.2012. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for either monetary compensation or the benefits under G.O.Ms.No.483 as amended from time to time including the amendments made under G.O.Ms.No.168. 9. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner is not interested in monitory compensation in respect of the subject land and the petitioner may be extended the concessions under G.O.Ms.No.483 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.168. 10. In the above Circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-Corporation to extend the benefits/concessions as provided in G.O.Ms.No.168, dated 07.04.2012, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.