IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11196 of 2008 Between: 1. Undavalli Radhakrishna 2. Undavalli Suresh Kumar 3. Undavalli Venkateshwar Rao 4. Undavalli Sudheer 5. Undavalli Mehar 6. Mathukumalli Manju 7. Mathukumalli Veera Venkata Nageshwar Rao ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1. The District Collector, Warangal 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, West Godavari. 3. The Tahsildar, Vungutur Mandal, West Godavari District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order and direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in an extentofAc.2.00 cents, Ac.1.11 cents andAc.0.89 cents in S.No.44, 45, 46, 144/1 and 144/2, situated at Ravulaparru village, Vungutur Mandal, West Godavari district without following the procedure and pending the petitioners objections dated 15.4.2008 raised in pursuance of notice under Section 5(A) of the Act in ROC NO.15/08 (B) dated 29.3.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent, is highly arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRP.RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ } O R D E R: The District Collector, 1st respondent herein, issued a Notification dated 15.3.2008 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) proposing to acquire an extent of Ac.04.00 cents of land in different survey numbers situated in Ravulaparru village, Mungutur Mandal, West Godavari District. The petitioners stated that though their lands are sought to be acquired neither their names were indicated nor correct description was furnished. They further contended that the acquisition itself is unnecessary and unwarranted and it would affect their livelihood. In the enquiry conducted under Section 5(A) of the Act, the petitioners claim to have submitted their representation. Their apprehension is that the respondents would dispossess even while verification to their claims and objections is in progress. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued proposing to acquire the lands in different survey numbers. An enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act has been conducted and the petitioners had put forward all their objections including those relating to the ownership, identity and extents of land. The actual cause of action to the petition would arise if only a Notification under Section 6 of the Act is issued disregard to their objections, etc. Further, the question of taking possession of the notified lands would arise only after an award is passed as is evident as per Section 16 of the Act. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies as and when the notification under Section 6 of the Act is published and directing that the respondents shall not disturb the possession of the petitioners unless and until an award is passed. No costs. _____________ 28.05.2008 bcj