THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 13147 OF 2010 Dated: 23.08.2010 Between: Yadla Venkata Rao ..... PETITIONER AND The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenali, Guntur District and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 13147 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the order dated 12.05.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent overruling the objections raised by the petitioner under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’), is arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner herein claims to be the owner and possessor of Ac.1.86 cents of land situated in Sy.Nos.255-1 and 255-2 of Revendrapudu Village of Duggirala Mandal, Guntur District. The said land was sought to be acquired for public purpose to wit., for provision of house sites to the weaker sections under Indiramma Programme. The notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 2.6.2009. Having proposed an enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, objections were invited from all the persons interested. The petitioner submitted his objections stating that he was a marginal and small farmer and as the land in question was gifted to his daughter at the time of her marriage, the same may be deleted from the acquisition proceedings. The 2nd respondent by endorsement dated 12.5.2010 rejected the petitioner’s objection. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed contending that the 2nd respondent had concluded the enquiry without application of mind to the relevant material placed before him. It is also contended that the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted as an empty formality without appreciating the objections raised in proper perspective. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having taken note of the material available on record, I do not find any substance in the contentions raised by the petitioner. It was found by the 2nd respondent that the petitioner was not an agriculturist and that he was Doctor by profession and that he was also a former M.L.A. and at present he is residing at Hyderabad. It was also found that the petitioner was holding an extent of Ac.11.64 cents in Chiluvuru and Thammapudi Villages and therefore he was not a small and marginal farmer as claimed by him. Even with regard to the plea that the land in question was gifted to his daughter at the time of marriage as Pasupukumkuma, no document could be produced to substantiate the same. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the objections raised by the petitioner cannot be held to be arbitrary or illegal. It is also brought to my notice by the learned Government Pleader that pursuant to the impugned order, the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was already published on 23.5.2010. Viewed from any angle, the interference by this Court is not warranted. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 23.08.2010 Ivd