IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No : 25387 of 2007 Between: Smt.Jagannata Chellamma W/o.Kataiah, aged 65 years, R/o.Chengambakam village Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Land Acquisition officer/Special Deputy Collector, Tirupathi, Chittoor(D) 2. The Revenue Divisonal officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District 3. The Mandal Revenue officer /Tahsildar, Satyavedu Mandal, Satyavedu , Chittoor District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess and acquire the petitioner agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1.90 cents in SY.No.30/5 of Chengambakam village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District without initiating land acquisition proceedings as being illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles, 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the said land otherwise than by following due process of law and direct the respondents to initiate land acquisition proceedings in respect of said land of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.VINOD.K.REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: G.P FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : W.P.No.25387 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to dispossess the petitioner from the agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1.90 cents in Sy.No.30/5 of Chengambakam village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittoor District, without initiating land acquisition proceedings as being illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the said land except after initiating the land acquisition proceedings. The case of the petitioner is that an extent of Ac.1.90 cents in Sy.No.30/5 of Chengambakam village, Chittoor District, was assigned to her by way of D.K.T. patta in the year 1994 and since then she is in possession and enjoyment of the said land and eking out her livelihood by doing agriculture. While so, the respondent-authorities, without any authority, whatsoever, are interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment over the said land stating that her land and other lands were required for establishment of a Industrial Park by A.P.I.I.C. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents admitting the fact that the petitioner was assigned the land in question. It is stated that the petitioner had alienated the land in question to Gandhari Subramanyam during the year 2002 and the name of the petitioner in the adangal has been rounded off and the name of G.Subramanyam was incorporated as pattadar and since then the said land is in continuous possession and enjoyment of G.Subramanyam. It is further stated that no action has been initiated to evict the petitioner from the land in question. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. According to the petitioner, she is the pattadar and possessor of the land in question and, therefore, without resorting to the land acquisition proceedings, she cannot be dispossessed and she is entitled for exgratia in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1307 dated 23.12.1993. On the other hand, it is the contention of the respondents that she had alienated the land to G.Subramanyam and the said alienation is contrary to Dharkhast Rules. Whether the petitioner has alienated the land and violated the Dharkhast Rules is not a matter, which has to be gone into in this writ petition. However, if the petitioner is the pattedar and possessor of the land and the patta was not cancelled, she is entitled for exgratia in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.1307 dated 23.12.1993, as, in the considered view of this Court that even if it is the assigned land, when it is required for a public purpose, the only remedy that is available to the authorities is to acquire the same by resorting to the land acquisition proceedings and pay exgratia in terms of the G.O.Ms.NO.1307, dated 23.12.1993. Hence, this Court directs the respondent authorities to acquire the above land in question after following the land acquisition proceedings, if it is really needed for public purpose i.e, for construction of Industrial Park and pay exgratia as provided for under G.O.Ms.No.1307 dated 23.12.1993 if the said DKT patta is not cancelled. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 19-04-2008 Gsn.