IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.24002 of 2009 Between: V. Nirmala, W/o.Gazendra Naidu ..... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its District Collector (Land Acquisition) Nellore, SPSR, Nellore District and others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.24002 OF 2009 ORDER: Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition requested time to get instructions on 06-11-2009. 2. The matter is coming up for admission. 3. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring action on the part of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in seeking to dispossess the petitioner from the land in Survey No.74/2B for an extent of Ac.1-22 cents out of Ac.2-09 cents situated at Punnepalli Village, Ozili Mandal, SPSR Nellore District without considering the objections made by the petitioner dated 24-10-2009, amounts to erroneous, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300(A) of Constitution of India, besides being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in question. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that she is a permanent resident of Kammavaripalem Village, SPSR Nellore District. It is also stated that on 02- 03-2006 the petitioner purchased the land in Survey No.74/2B to an extent of Ac.2-09 cents from its lawful vendor by way of registered sale deed and ever since, she had been in possession and enjoyment of the said land. The said land is wet land and the petitioner had been raising paddy, groundnut and other seasonal crops. After purchase she had spent huge amount to install two bore wells and laid a pipeline. The entire family is dependant on the income derived from the said land. 5. It is further stated that the pattadar pass books and title deeds had also been issued in favour of the petitioner. 6. It is further stated that a notice under Form No.3 was sent by respondent No.2 to the father of the petitioner. Immediately after the service of the said notice, the father of the petitioner submitted detailed objections by way of registered legal notice, wherein he had stated that the land belongs to the petitioner and he is in no way concerned. Subsequent thereto, respondent No.2 on 29.07.2008, sent another notice under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) to the petitioner, wherein objections had been called for. Immediately after receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted detailed objections through registered legal notice, wherein the petitioner categorically stated that the land is wet land under the Ayacut of Punnepalli Tank and the petitioner incurred Rs.2,00,000/- to lay two power bore wells and pipelines and she had been raising three crops per year and the total extent of land is Ac.2-09 cents. The entire family is dependant on the said income. 7. It is also the case of the petitioner that for the proposed acquisition of land for allotment of house sites, the said land is not suitable which is lower in level and several other facts had also been narrated in detail in paragraph Nos.6,7 and 8 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. 8. It is not in serious controversy that the petitioner already filed objections before respondent No.2. It is needless to say that respondent No.2 is bound to consider such objections, which had been filed, in accordance with law in the light of the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act. However, at that stage, the writ petitioner had challenged the same by filing the present writ petition. 9. In the light of the facts and circumstances and also the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, this Court is of the considered opinion that the writ petition be disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the objections of the petitioner by giving personal hearing to the petitioner, while conducting the 5-A enquiry under the provisions of the Act and to take appropriate decision in this regard in accordance with law. Till such decision is taken, status quo obtaining as on today to be maintained. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ P.S.NARAYANA, J November 9, 2009 Note: Furnish C.C. of the order within three days B/O.MD