THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.25185 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioners are owners of small bits of land in sub-divisions of survey Nos.162 and 166 of Yellapuram Village, Musunuru Mandal, Krishna District. Through a notification, dated 11.08.2006, published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), the District Collector, Krishna, the 1st respondent, proposed to acquire Ac.1.94 cents in those survey numbers. Enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted. The petitioners submitted a detailed representation stating, inter alia, that their lands were acquired earlier once in the year 1977, and thereafter, in 1984, and many beneficiaries, who are allotted plots out of the said land, have sold away the same. They further pleaded that there is developed land along the road to provide house sites to the needy persons and that their family with four children is totally depending upon the left over agricultural land, and the said objections were not taken into account before declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 18.11.2006. Thereafter, notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act were issued. The petitioners challenge the entire proceedings. They contend that this is the third round of acquisition, and though there is no genuine necessity, the acquisition is resorted to. On behalf of the respondents, a detailed counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the objections raised by the petitioners in the course of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act were taken into account and a declaration Section 6 of the Act was published. It is further stated that the there is acute necessity to acquire the plots and adequate compensation is paid. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. It is not uncommon that the Government resorts to the procedure prescribed under the Act to acquire properties for various public purposes. Acquisition of land for providing house sites was taken up as an important scheme and a social welfare measure. However, in the process of acquisition, proper care is required to be taken in identifying the genuine beneficiaries, and in ensuring that good agricultural lands are not subjected to acquisition. More than the interests of the owner of the land, the aspects, such as food security, need to be taken into account. Government has been issuing instructions from time to time to ensure that the lands of small farmers and good agricultural lands must be spared from acquisition. This is the third round of acquisition for providing house sites in the same village. In the year 1977 and 1984, acquisitions have been made and on both the occasions, the petitioners lost their lands. They are virtually left over with the land, which is proposed to be acquired. Fairness demands that the same person is not subjected to acquisition repeatedly. The allegation of the petitioners that several beneficiaries, who were allotted plots carved out of their land, have sold away them, was not even addressed. In the recent past, the political wing of the Government has resorted to indiscriminate acquisition of land and providing house sites only as a populistic measure than as a scheme to rescue the needy. Instances are not lacking where even before the houses are constructed on the plots that were allotted decades ago, acquisition is resorted to afresh. Though the selection of beneficiaries was done objectively and properly, two decades ago, of late, the genuinity of the list of beneficiaries is under serious doubt. Fictitious persons are emerging, or those who are already well-off, are figuring in the list of beneficiaries. This observation is made, in the context of the allegation made by the petitioners that several beneficiaries, who are allotted plots on earlier occasions, have sold away the same. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings are set aside. In case the respondents feel that there is a necessity to provide house sites, they shall, a) verify whether the plots allotted to the beneficiaries on earlier occasions were sold away, and if so, resume them for fresh allotment; and b) the land said to be existing by the side of the road shall be considered for allotment of house sites. The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petition also stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:17.02.2012 GJ