IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14520 of 2008 Between: Anisetti Satyanarayana S/o.Late Sri Papi Reddy R/o.Nagulapalli, U.Kothapalli Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari at Kakinada. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer & Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 The Tahsildar, U.Kothapalli, East Godavari 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the land acquisition proceedings initiated against the petitioners' land pursuant to the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, bearing Ref.G2/3501/2008, dated 17.06.2008 and also the Draft Declaration issued U/s.6 of Land Acquisition Act, bearing Ref. G2/3501/2008, dated 27.06.2008 for acquisition of the land of an extent of ac.0.07 cents situated in Sy.No. 17/2 of Ponnada Village, U.Kothapalli Mandal, E.G. District, belonging to the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and against the spirit of the decisions of this Hon'ble Court and consequently direct the respondents to drop all further proceedings against the petitioner's land in this regard. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.14520 of 2008 ORDER: The land belonging to the petitioner is sought to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for public purpose, namely, providing pathway to House sites to weaker sections under Phase-II Indiramma Programme. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 17.06.2008 and while invoking urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act, enquiry under Section 5A of the Act was dispensed with, followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act, dated 27.06.2008. The action of the respondents in proposing to acquire the land of the petitioner is challenged in this writ petition primarily on the ground that the respondents are not justified in invoking the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act, thereby depriving the opportunity to raise objections to the proposed acquisition. A perusal of the impugned notification shows that the land in question is sought to be acquired for providing pathway to house sites to weaker sections under Phase-II Indiramma Programme. Since the purpose for which the land is sought to be acquired does not warrant invoking the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act, thereby depriving the petitioner an opportunity to raise his objections, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to conduct enquiry as contemplated under Section 5A of the Act. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of setting aside the declaration, dated 27.06.2008, made under Section 6 of the Act and with a direction to the respondents to conduct enquiry under Section 5A of the Act and take necessary further steps following due process of law. No costs. _______________ 08.07.2008 Note: Issue CC in two days. (b/o) VGB