IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 20786 of 2008 Between: 1 Tanneru Venkata Ramaiah S/o. Raghavulu R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. 2 T. Swarnalatha W/o. Raghavulu R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. 3 T. Bharathi W/o. Venkata Ramanaiah R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. 4 T. Srinivasulu S/o.Raghavalu R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. 5 T. Venkatachalapathi S/o. Raghavulu R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. 6 T. Suneetha Laxmi W/o. Venkata Chalapathi R/o. Rama Mandiram Street, Poddalalur Village, Poddalakur (M), Nellore District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector S.P.S. Nellore District, Nellore. 2 The District Committee for Land Acquisition Rep by Joint Collector, S.P.S. Nellore District. 3 The Special Collector (L.A) Telugu Ganga Project, Nellore. 4 The Special Deputy Collector (L.A) Telugu Ganga Project, Sri Potti Sri Ramulu, Nellore District, Nellore. .....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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in ﬁxing the market value go by the principles for determination of the market value to the land in Sy. No.173/A, situated at Podalakur Village and Mandal, Potti Sri Ramulu Nellore District, as bad, arbitrary, contrary to the established principles of law. Counsel for the Petitioners: MS.M.VIDYAVATHI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: The lands of the petitioners in various survey numbers were notiﬁed for acquisition, through draft notiﬁcation, dated 07.06.2007 and draft declaration, dated 08.06.2007. The award enquiry is in progress. The petitioners contend that in the notice, dated 13.05.2008, in the context of oﬀering 80% of the tentative market value, the respondents have taken into account the value that existed much prior to the date of notiﬁcation under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They claim to have made a representation, dated 31.07.2008, with a request to take the market value of the land as on the date of draft notiﬁcation and complain that the representation is not being considered. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The petitioners gained an impression that a particular ﬁgure is being taken as market value when the same was mentioned in the notice, dated 13.05.2008, while oﬀering 80% of the tentative market value of the land. The oﬀer made in the said notice is purely tentative and it cannot have any bearing on the actual award enquiry. It is trite that during the enquiry, the comparable sales as well as the plea raised by the petitioners needs to be taken into account. Even the other contentions raised by the petitioners need to be considered during the award enquiry. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer shall take into account all the pleas raised by the petitioners, be it as regards the value or the extent of the land, while passing the award. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:23.09.2008. kdl