IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13127 of 2008 Between: Chichadi Shantha @ Tellam Shantha D/o.Late Chichadi Kistaiah, W/o.Tellam Maraiah R/o.Cheemalavarigudem village Buttaiahgudem Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector,Khammam 2 The Special Dy.Collector (Land Acquisition) Indira Sagar Project, Paloncha Unit, At Paloncha, Khammam 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 writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent No.2 in considering the claim petition filed by the petitioner dated 20.9.2007 to refer the matter to civil court as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to refer the claim of the petitioner to civil court under Sec.18 r/w sec 30 of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of the lands to an extent of Ac.8.32 gts out of total extent of Ac.17.24 gts in SY.No.80/A Ac.1.14 gts out of Ac.2.27 gts in SY.No.127/A Acs.1.12 gts out of Ac.2.26 gts in Sy.No.193/A total admeasuring Ac.11.18 gts respectively situated at Thatkurugommu village, Velerupadu Mandal, Khammam District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.13127 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the inaction on the part of the second respondent in considering the representation made by the petitioner, dated 20.09.2007, seeking reference of the matter to the civil Court under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), is illegal and arbitrary. It is stated that the petitioner’s name was not shown in the notification published under Section 4(1) of the Act and that there was also no notice during the award enquiry and therefore, she could not participate in the award proceedings. However, she made a representation on 20.09.2007 seeking reference, as soon as she came to know that an award was passed. Since there was no response from the respondents, a legal notice, dated 12.06.2008, was also issued. Alleging that the said request of the petitioner has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed. Though I am not inclined to express any opinion as to the entitlement of the petitioner for payment of compensation as sought by her, since the representation made by her seeking reference is still pending before the second respondent, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.09.2007, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ 24.06.2008 Note: Issue CC in three days. (b/o) VGB