THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17921 of 2007 Date: 26.02.2008 Between: Madikonda Veda Lakshmi And two others. .... PETITIONERS AND The State of A.P., Rep by its Principal Secretary to Revenue (The Land Acquisition Department), Hyderabad. And three others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Ramakrishna Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17921 of 2007 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed seeking the following substantive relief: “…Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing notification in Rc.No.G3/3497/2007, dated 24.7.2007 as published in Eenadu Telugu Daily newspaper on 7.8.2007 under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act notifying intention to acquire the lands of Ac.1.26 cents of and Ac.2.74 cents respectively covered by survey numbers 314/2(p) and 314/3(p) of Veeravalli village as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, irrational, violative of provisions of the Land acquisition Act and Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purposes) Act, 2006 and offends articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to drop the acquisition of the said lands and pass such other order..” At the hearing, an adjournment was sought on behalf of Sri Nimmagadda Satyanrayana, the learned counsel for the petitioners. A perusal of the record shows that the only contention raised in the writ petition is that the agricultural lands of the petitioners cannot be acquired without their conversion for non-agricultural purposes under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Lands (Conversion for Non- Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2006. This issue is no longer res integra in view of judgment dated 28.12.2007 of this Court in W.P.No.18881 of 2006 and Batch wherein an identical contention has been rejected. For the afore-mentioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.22981 of 2007 filed by the petitioners seeking interim relief is also dismissed. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:26.02.2008 mdaa