IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27164 of 2010 Between: S. Vaheeda Begum … Petitioner And The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Secretary, Revenue Department & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P. Gangarami Reddy Counsel for the respondents: GP for Land Acquisition This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27164 of 2010 ORDER:- The grievance, in short, of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that even though when the land to an extent of Ac.0.05 cents in Sy.No.91 of Vavilala Village was utilized for formation of a road in connection with congress plenary sessions in the year 1992, no compensation has been paid. The petitioner pleaded that an alternative land in Sy.No.18 was proposed, but the same has become abortive in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Intellectuals Forum, Thirupathi vs State of A.P. & others[1]. The petitioner has therefore sought for a Mandamus to direct the respondents either to allot alternative site or pay compensation in lieu of taking over of Ac.0.05 cents of land belonging to her. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, he has inter alia denied utilizing any land of the petitioner for formation of road. Along with the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, she has filed a copy of the purported statement showing allotment of alternative land to the land holders, who have lost their lands in formation of approach road to Rajiv Nagar, prepared by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati Rural Mandal. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that her land is shown at Sl.No.14 of the statement. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition stated that since the said statement is filed along with the reply affidavit, she had no opportunity to receive instructions. This Court in Writ Petition No.16705 of 2010 has passed order on 03.11.2011 permitting the petitioner therein to make a detailed representation to respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the latter were directed to consider the same and take appropriate decision depending upon the material that may be produced by the petitioner therein. Since there is a prima facie material showing that the petitioner’s land of Ac.0.05 cents was utilized for formation of road, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition No.16705 of 2010 with the direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to examine the claim of the petitioner with reference to the material that may be produced by her along with her representation and take a decision thereon within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation by the petitioner. As a sequel, WPMP.No.34707 of 2010 is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 24.11.2011 ES [1] AIR 2006 SC 1350