The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.17033 of 2011 Date: 1st November, 2011 Between: Gadde Satyanarayana ..... Petitioner and 1.The Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri B.Prakasam Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: --- Counsel for respondent No.3: AGP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following : O R D E R: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents, in initiating land acquisition proceedings in respect of Acs.12-00 and Acs.6-00 of lands situated in Survey Nos.49/2 and 51/2 respectively of Pattennapalem Village, Jangareddygudem Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary. The respondents have initiated acquisition proceedings in connection with excavation of Chintalapudi Lift Irrigation Scheme and the above- mentioned lands, belonging to the petitioner, were also notified for the said purpose. In pursuance of the notification, issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), notice in form.3 was issued under Section 5-A of the Act calling upon the petitioner and any other persons interested therein to submit their objections. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his objections on 16-06-2011. Before those objections were considered and order passed by the respondents, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. In my opinion, no cause of action had arisen for the petitioner to rush to this Court by way of this Writ Petition, as the respondents have not disposed of the petitioner’s objections in the enquiry initiated under Section 5-A of the Act. It is not the pleaded case of the petitioner that the respondents have violated the statutory procedure in issuing the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act. Therefore, no Writ Petition can be filed even before the petitioner’s objections were considered and a decision thereon could be taken. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed as premature with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy as and when any adverse order, on the objections filed by the petitioner under Section 5-A of the Act, is passed. As a sequel, WPMP.No.20461 of 2011, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 1st November, 2011 LUR