IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.23658 of 2002 Between: Korada Ramu Naidu @ Tata and six others. … Petitioners And District Collector, Vizianagaram and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Chakravarthy for Sri O.Manohar Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Land Acquisition for R.1 to R.3. None for R.4. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to set aside notification dated 22-6-2002 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short “the Act”). Heard Sri Chakravarthy, learned counsel representing Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. A perusal of the impugned notification shows that the land of the petitioners was proposed to be acquired for a public purpose, viz., to construct an alternative bund for the irrigation tank to facilitate widening of the National High Way. The impugned notification has not provided for dispensing with enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Unless the urgency provision contained under Section 17(4) of the Act is invoked, it is incumbent upon the respondents to hold enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act before taking further steps for acquisition of the proposed land. Even though the enquiry is not envisaged in the impugned notification, in the absence of invocation of urgency provision, it is reasonable to presume that such an enquiry is envisaged. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondents 1 to 3 to hold enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and give the petitioners an opportunity of personal hearing, before proceeding with the proposed acquisition. It is needless to declare that if any steps, in pursuance of the impugned notification, are taken, including publication of declaration under Section 6 of the Act, they stand invalid. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:12-2-2009 MNR