IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.27333, 27720/2007, 4609/2008 W.P.No.27333/2007 Between : Sivaji Nagar Plot Owners’ Welfare Association, Represented by its President K.P.Kesava Rao, Kothapet, Saroornagar, Hyderabad .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department .. Respondents and others Counsel for petitioner :Sri B.Adinarayana Rao Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 : G.P. for Land Acquisition Counsel for respondent No.4 : Sri D.Ranganatha Kumar The Court made the following: Common Order: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. This batch of Writ Petitions raise common issues of fact and law. Therefore, they are being heard and disposed of by this Common Order. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners, who are owners of different extents of lands situated in Mangalpalli Village, Ibrahimpatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, assailed the validity of notification No.G1/2419/2006, dated 16-11-2006, and declaration, dated 13-11-2007, issued under Sections 4 (1) and 6 respectively of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), by respondent No.1- District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. In the impugned notification and the declaration, the purpose of the proposed acquisition was stated to be “for construction of houses to the general public by the A.P.Housing Board.” At the hearing, it is submitted by Sri B.Adinarayana Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners that this Court quashed a similar notification in a judgment reported in D.Ramadevi and others vs. District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru, and others[1], and held that the proposed acquisition for an identical purpose viz., construction of houses by the Housing Board and selling them to general public was not for public purpose. Accordingly, while allowing the said Writ Petition and quashing the notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Act, this Court gave liberty to the respondents therein to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law and in the light of the findings rendered in the said judgment. This position is conceded by the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and Sri D.Ranganatha Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the A.P.Housing Board, representing respondent No.4. Following the said judgment, these Writ Petitions are allowed and the impugned notifications and declarations are quashed with liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings in accordance with law and in the light of the observations contained in the judgment cited supra. As a sequel, interim orders granted in these Writ Petitions are vacated and the Interlocutory applications pending are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________ C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J Date : 14-7-2011 AM [1] AIR 2009 Andhra Pradesh 15