IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17409 of 2008 Between: Rayapati Narasamma W/o. Chantibabu @ Sattaiah R/o. Kondagunturu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavary District at Kakinada. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajahmundry, East Godavary District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rajanagaram Mandal, E.G.Dist. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR M.BABJI FOR MR G. RADHAKRISHNAN Counsel for the respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from the land admeasuring Ac.0.38 cents in Survey No.324/2 of Kondagunturu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri M.Babji, learned counsel representing Sri G.Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. The above mentioned land of the petitioner was notified for acquisition under notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) dated 14-04-2008. The petitioner received notice dated 28-04-2008 issued under Section 5-A of the Act and she filed her objections on 12-05-2008 before respondent No.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that even before the completion of enquiry, the respondents are seeking to dispossess her. From the averments contained in the affidavit, it appears that the writ petition is based on mere apprehension that the petitioner will be dispossessed from the land. The provisions of the Act are clear that when enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act is envisaged, possession cannot be taken until declaration under Section 6 of the Act is made. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner until completion of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Act and further procedure contemplated under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.22614 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 11th August, 2008 vrn