ORDER : Challa Gunaranjan, J. The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not finalizing the enquiry alleged to have been initiated based on the complaint given by certain third parties with respect to the tampering of revenue records of Cherlopalle Village, Owk Mandal, Kurnool District, which concerned the lands those acquired under Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1993 and releasing compensation to the petitioners in terms thereof as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. 2. (a) Petitioners lands were acquired for the purpose of constructing Barrow Area in Thimmaraju Tank Bund for Owk Valley Complex under S.R.B.C. from KM 115.584 to 119.500. The 3 rd respondent – Land Acquisition Officer has, after conducting due enquiry, passed Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1993 determining the compensation for the lands acquired. Under the aforesaid Award, the lands have been categorized as Category – I and II and compensation was fixed as Rs.20,000/- and Rs.24,000/- per acre respectively. 1 st petitioner and 8 th petitioner have sought reference of their cases to competent Court as they were aggrieved by the determination of compensation and the same were numbered as O.P. Nos . 43/99 and 19/99 respectively and were taken up along with other references made by similarly situated land owners and the court below has enhanced the compensation for both Category – I and Category – II lands uniformly for Rs.46,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Officer preferred LAAS Nos.3416 and 2918 of 2004. Along with other connected appeals, this Court dismissed the same by common order dated 09.02.2007 and confirmed the orders of Reference Court enhancing and fixing the compensation as Rs.46,000/- per acre. Other petitioners though have not sought reference, subsequent to the order of reference Court have made applications under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act seeking to determine or extend the benefit as provided under Reference Court by paying compensation at the rate of Rs.46,000/- per acre. (b) While that being so, instead of paying and settling compensation in terms of the award passed, the respondents by entertaining complaint given by some third parties styled as President of Rytu Sangham and one Shaik Ahmed of Nandyal, who alleged that the revenue records with respect to the lands under acquisition were tampered and compensation was being paid to persons but otherwise are not entitled to, enquiry was taken up. By letters dated 19.12.2006, 23.02.2007 and 21.03.2007, the complaints made above were sought to be enquired into by the 2 nd respondent and for this purpose, the 3 rd respondent was asked to submit a report as to whether there was any tampering of revenue records and to verify whether the Award No.29/92-93, dated 30.03.1993 and Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1994 with reference to the above said lands, any undeserving persons whose names came to be included as beneficiaries were being paid compensation and if any such payments are made to initiate necessary action for recovery of the same. (c) The 3 rd respondent by proceedings dated 12.04.2007 submitted report inter alia stating that the revenue records could not be verified as the entire records were seized by ACB authorities and were not available with the concerned offices. Further in Award No.29/92-93 and Award No.6/92-93, the names of beneficiaries who were entitled for compensation have been indicated. Thereafter, no further steps were taken towards concluding the enquiry nor the compensation which petitioners were entitled under the Award was being paid. Petitioners having no other choice, approached this Court by present writ petition. 3. (a) Counter has been filed by respondents stating that an extent of Acres 296.05 cents in Survey No.63/1A etc., of Cherlopalle Village of Owk Mandal, Kurnool District, was acquired by 3 rd respondent for the purpose of improvements to Thimmaraju Tank Bund and Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1993 was passed determining the compensation. The aforesaid compensation determined was to be paid to all 65 awardees. Some of them have sought reference and the Reference Court has by order dated 26.03.2004 in O.P. Nos.45/99 and batch, in all 12 cases, enhanced the compensation to Rs.46,000/- per acre and the same has been confirmed by the Hon’ble High Court. (b) Pending appeals before the High Court, in pursuance to the interim orders, the respondents have deposited 50% of the decretal amount. However, based on the complaints received from President of Rytu Sangham and one Shaik Ahmed of Nandyal, by which it was stated that certain of the government lands were shown as patta lands by tampering revenue records and the middle agents along with alleged pattadars claimed compensation which was being paid by playing fraud. Therefore, enquiry was initiated and ACB has seized all the relevant records and the enquiry is underway. Therefore, enquiry was initiated and ACB has seized all the relevant records and the enquiry is underway. (c) Parallelly, even the respondents have also initiated enquiry into the matter and 3 rd respondent was directed to submit report. Based on such enquiry, the respondents have affected recovery of amounts which were paid to the petitioners under Award No.6/92-93 from that of the compensation payable to their houses/structures as they have claimed compensation for the lands which was by tampering of revenue records. The factum of recovery of amounts was communicated to the petitioners by 3 rd respondent by notice dated 31.03.2007 in Form No.12(12) of Award No.10/2007-08 and that petitioners have not responded to the same and hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Petitioners have filed reply stating that in pursuance to the enquiry initiated by ACB, a charge sheet came to be filed against 14 revenue employees and one bank Manager besides 8 th petitioner, however, due to lack of sanction from the Government, the Court had returned the charge sheet. Later, ACB filed fresh charge sheet only against four accused, who were then officers involved in the acquisition process and thereafter, proceedings against accused 1 and 2 got abated as they died and the remaining two persons filed discharge petitions in Crl. M.P. No.228 of 2013 and Crl. M.P. No.192 of 2013 before Special Court for trial of ACB cases at Kurnool and the same were allowed by common order dated 23.01.2014, thereby no criminal proceedings were pending, much less C.C. No.70 of 2013. As no proceedings are pending either criminal proceedings or any other departmental proceedings against any of the officers alleged to have been involved in tampering of revenue records, the respondents were not justified in denying compensation to the petitioners. Petitioners further stated that in pursuant to the interim directions granted by the High Court in Land Acquisition Appeal, 50% was paid and the remaining 50% was due. Even the notice dated 31.03.2007 alleged to have been issued by the respondents was never served upon them, so the question of adjustment from the compensation which was otherwise payable to them for the structures and buildings does not arise. 5. Heard C.Upendra, learned counsel, representing Sri K.Narendranath Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing on behalf of the respondents. 6. Perused the record. 7. 5. Heard C.Upendra, learned counsel, representing Sri K.Narendranath Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue representing on behalf of the respondents. 6. Perused the record. 7. The facts narrated above elaborately discuss about the claim of petitioners for compensation emanating from the stage of acquiring and determination of compensation by way of Award and such Award amount being enhanced by further reference, which was confirmed by High Court, which are not in dispute, however, the only aspect remains contested is with respect to non-disbursement of such compensation on the ground that the petitioners names were reflected as land owners in the revenue records on account of tampering the same with the connivance of certain officers of the Government. In normal course, once Award has been passed determining the compensation, enhanced by the reference Court, upon attaining finality by confirming in appeal, the persons whose lands were affected were to be paid compensation accordingly. In the present case, based on pseudo complaints received from President of Rytu Sangham and one Shaik Ahmed of Nandyal, an investigation was taken up by both ACB, which is criminal in nature and also by the respondents themselves to ascertain as to whether there was any tampering of revenue records. In the counter, except stating that ACB has seized the revenue records nothing has been stated as to what finally resulted in such enquiry. However, in the reply filed by the petitioners, orders in Crl. M.P. Nos.228/13 and 192/2013 have been placed on record which show that while discharging the accused Nos.3 and 4, who were then MROs, the said Court had recorded finding that the evidence on record failed to establish even a prima face case against those two persons and so far as other two accused 1 and 2 are concerned, they died because of their old age and the proceedings against them were abated, thereby the entire proceedings in C.C. No.70/2013 were closed. 8. The 3 rd respondent as competent officer under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act has conducted Award enquiry, for which purpose the revenue records and title of the petitioners were scrutinized and verified for the purpose of payment of compensation. 8. The 3 rd respondent as competent officer under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act has conducted Award enquiry, for which purpose the revenue records and title of the petitioners were scrutinized and verified for the purpose of payment of compensation. Even the enquiry which was once again parallelly conducted by the respondents basing on the two complaints given by third party individuals, which was also basis for initiation of enquiry by ACB, has not concluded so far and no final report of such enquiry has been produced or placed on record. At any rate, there is no sanctity in law for such enquiry as petitioners right to claim compensation emanates from the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and the Award enquiry has clinchingly made petitioners entitled for the compensation, which was also further contested by petitioners before Reference Court and the same was enhanced to Rs.46,000/- per acre and thereafter, the appeals preferred challenging such enhancement have been dismissed confirming the same. Therefore, this Court sees no justification for the respondents to withhold the payment of balance compensation payable to the petitioners in terms of Award No.29/92-93, dated 30.03.1993 and Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1994, as enhanced by the Reference Court and confirmed by this Court in AS No.286/2004 and batch. 9. Award No.6/93-94 relates to the acquisition of lands in Cherlopalle Village and whereas Award No.29/92-93 related to acquisition of land in Sunkesula Village. The report dated 12.04.2007 submitted by 3 rd respondent to the 2 nd respondent apparently was not based on any enquiry and after affording opportunity to the petitioners, rather is in the nature of only submission of remarks in reply to letters dated 23.02.2007 and 21.03.2007 of the 2 nd respondent. Further even in the said report, it is stated that with reference to Award No.6/93-94, on verification it was found that 9 persons were paid compensation who alleged to have tampered the village accounts and as the original records were seized by ACB, it is not verifiable as to the classification of lands. Further even in the said report, it is stated that with reference to Award No.6/93-94, on verification it was found that 9 persons were paid compensation who alleged to have tampered the village accounts and as the original records were seized by ACB, it is not verifiable as to the classification of lands. However, in the last portion of the report, it refers to names of 9 persons which include some of the petitioners herein showing them as culprits alleged to have claimed compensation and received in part and as they were shown to be beneficiaries by way of tampering of village accounts, compensation payable to them for the houses and structures was withheld and he sought necessary orders from the Government for being credited to Government’s account or deposited under CCD. However, based on this report, no further action was initiated much less a proper enquiry was undertaken for concluding that the petitioners claim under the award was based on tampering of records. 10. On contra, in the very award, the 3 rd respondent conducted enquiry and determined the compensation. For the sake of reference, the portion of award with respect to 8 th petitioner dealing with Sy.No.82 is extracted as under: “33) Survey No. 82 Extent Acquired Ac.C.4.28 R.P.A. Rs. 24,000/- Land Value Rs. 1,10,272.00 (30%) Solatium Rs. 30,816.00 Total (without interest) Rs. 1,33,536.00 (9%) Interest Rs. 12,018.00 Total (with interest) Rs. 1,45,554.00 The land under acquisition which is in Kulam no.82 stands registered in the names of Gorla Pedda Ananthaiah as per 10(1) account of Cherlapalli Village. During the award enquiry it is revealed that the land under Acquisition is under the possession and enjoyment of Sri Gorla Pedda Ananthaiah S/o. Pedda Ananthaiah, to an extent of 4.28 acres of land. He deposed that his father is the registered pattadar and the land has come to his share after the death of his father, that it is his self acquired property that it is under his possession and enjoyment with saleable property that it is free from encumbrances and that he has got 1 major son living with him under Joint family and 2 married daughters who are residing with their husbands. There are no other claimants. There are no other claimants. The above land owner has deposed that there are no structures, buildings, tombs, wells, or any other kind of permanent structures and trees in the land under acquisition, that it is neither land assigned under L.C, Act nor land assigned under darkasth rules and that it neither belongs to the endowment department nor to the Wakf board. He agreed to abide by the statutory provisions and other rules of the land acquisition act. The VAO of Cherlopalli (v) certified about correctness of the facts deposed by the claimant. During the award enquiry she claimed market value at Rs. 40,000/- forty thousands only per acre but failed to adduce or produce documentary evidence in support of her claim. Hence the claim is rejected as baseless. The market value at Rs.24,000/- per acre fixed already holds good. The total land compensation of Rs.1,45,554/- to an extent of Acs. 4.28 is awarded and ordered to be paid to Sri Gorla Pedda Ananthaiah S/o. Pedda Ananthaiah of Cherlopalli village.” Similarly even for other petitioners, the enquiry was held and compensation came to be determined. 11. The respondents have stated in the counter that the amounts which were to be paid to the petitioners on account of compensation for the buildings and structures were sought to be adjusted and recovered from the compensation which has been already paid to them, for which purpose, a notice was sent to the petitioners. Petitioners have seriously disputed the service of such notice. No material has been placed before this Court to justify that said notices were served on the petitioners. Even otherwise, the respondents behind the back of petitioners cannot conclude any such enquiry holding that the compensation payable to them on account of the lands which were subject matter of Award No.29/92-93, dated 30.03.1993 and Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1994, have been accrued by claiming benefit in view of tampering of evidence, and propose adjustment. As the report which was called for in relation to the said enquiry has never culminated in proper enquiry, assuming the respondents had such power and jurisdiction to conduct such enquiry dehorse the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and that petitioners were ever given an opportunity of going through the said report and submitting their objections, any such unilateral recovery and adjustment would be clearly in violation of principles of natural justice and illegal. Once award is passed and on enquiry, appropriate compensation came to be determined, the respondents would become functus officio, they are precluded from once again conducting any fresh enquiry to redetermine the claims made by petitioners. Such course of action particularly the manner in which it was sought to be done in the present case is impermissible. Even the ACB enquiry which resulted in C.C. No.70 of 2013 also came to be closed, in this view of the matter, this Court opines that the respondents were not justified in withholding the payment of balance compensation to the petitioners on the pretext of pending enquiry, when there was none. 12. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the balance compensation in pursuance to Award No.6/93-94, dated 23.08.1994, as expeditiously as possible. No costs.