THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 16017 OF 2010 Dated: 21.04.2011 Between: M/s. Gayatri Estates … Petitioner And The Special Deputy Collector … Respondent The Court made the following:- THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 16017 OF 2010 O R D E R : The petitioner herein claims title and possession in respect of Ac.36 guntas of land having purchased under various registered sale deeds. The petitioner obtained a layout vide proceedings of HUDA dated 16.09.2004 and sold several plots to third parties. In the meanwhile proceedings were initiated for acquisition of the land covered by survey Nos.825 to 827, 829, 830, 834, 1015 to 1018 of Upparpally Village, Ranga Reddy District including the petitioner’s land for the purpose of laying the Outer Ring Road. Challenging the section 4(1) notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.478 of 2006. By that time the petitioner was still in possession of 26, 930.96 sq.yards out of 56,479 sq.yards of plotted area under the layout. However, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the award enquiry, an award was passed on 09.01.2009. The petitioner came to know about the same only on 05.03.2010 when the notice under Section 12(2) was served. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed to set aside the award as the same was passed without notice to the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Y.Ravindra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. This Court, while directing rule nisi, by order dated 07.07.2010 directed that the awarded amount to the extent of the land claimed by the petitioner should not be deposited in the civil Court, pursuant to the impugned award dated 09.01.2009. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the fact that no notice issued to the petitioner during the award enquiry has not been disputed. It is explained in the counter affidavit that notices were not issued to the petitioner as his name was not mentioned in the revenue records. However, the material placed before this Court shows that even by the date of the notification under Section 4(1), the petitioner was in possession of substantial portion of the land acquired. The counter affidavit further shows that long prior to the award the petitioner submitted an affidavit along with the documents, however the same were not considered merely on the ground of non- appearance of the petitioner at the time of award enquiry. It is also brought to my notice that in identical circumstances, Writ Petition No.2247 of 2010 was filed by some of the land owners challenging the award that was passed pursuant to the acquisition for the purpose of formation of Outer Ring Road on the very same ground that the said award was passed without notice to them. As there was no dispute that the award was passed without notice to the petitioners therein, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 10.02.2011 quashing the award so far as the petitioner therein was concerned. It is not disputed before this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the petitioner herein is also similarly situated and that the impugned award dated 09.01.2009 was passed without notice to the petitioner. Having regard to the admitted fact that the petitioner was not given an opportunity while passing the impugned award, I deem it appropriate to quash the impugned award dated 09.01.2009 so far as the petitioner herein is concerned. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent to permit the petitioner to file his claim petition together with the material to substantiate his claim within a period of four (4) weeks from today. On receipt of such claim together with the documents, the respondent shall consider the same and pass a supplementary award within a period of two (2) weeks thereafter. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 21.04.2011 Ivd