IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No. 13417 of 2009 Between: S. Satyanarayana, S/o. Late Jangaiah, R/o. H.No. 8-5-121/2, Miladevpally Village, Bandlaguda Kalasa Rajendranagar Mandal, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Prl Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Hyderabad District at Hyderabad. 3 The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (Genl.) Hyderabad, Hyderabad District. 4 Tahsildar, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or declaring the proposed impugned action of the respondents to demolish of the petitioner house building D.No.8-5-121/2 situated in Plot Nos. 17 and 18 in Sy.Nos.163 164/P and 165 of Bandlaguda Khalsa of Rajendranagar Municipality pursuant to the order of the 2nd respondent in Progs. No. B1/102/2007, dt. 7-3-2009, without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and for a consequential order directing the respondents to drop all further proceedings including demolition of the above house property of the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH.DHANAMJAYA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the action of the respondents in proposing to demolish his building bearing D.No.8-5- 121/2 situated in Plot Nos.17 and 18 in Sy.Nos.163, 164/P & 165 of Bandlaguda Khalsa of Rajendranagar Municipality, pursuant to the order dated 07.03.2009 of the 2nd respondent-District Collector, Hyderabad, without following due process of law. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the residential building bearing D.No.8-5-121/2 situated in Plot Nos.17 and 18 in Sy.Nos.163, 164/P & 165 of Bandlaguda Khalsa of Rajendranagar Municipality. It is the case of the petitioner that a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the L.A.Act’) was issued showing the particulars of his property proposed to be acquired for the purpose of road widening, but however, the said notification does not reflect his name nor the name of any person as the owner of the said building and he was straightaway issued with notice dated 15.12.2007 by the 3rd respondent stating that his land is required for the purpose of road widening and he was directed to vacate the premises and deliver possession of the same before 22.07.2007 without putting him on any notice and without affording an opportunity of personal hearing. Questioning the said action of the respondents, he filed W.P.No.6056 of 2008 and this Court allowed the said writ petition on 16.12.2008 directing the petitioner to file his objections to the acquisition under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act, and thereupon, the respondents to conduct 5-A enquiry giving the petitioner an opportunity of a personal hearing, then take a decision under Section 5-A of the L.A. Act and to proceed thereafter in accordance with the provisions of the L.A. Act. It is the grievance of the petitioner that pursuant to the said directions of this Court in W.P.No.6056 of 2008, he submitted his objections in detail with regard to acquisition of his property, but the 2nd respondent without considering his objections and without assigning any reasons, passed an order on 07.03.2009 stating that the objections are overruled in view of public purpose, and in pursuance thereof, the respondents are trying to demolish his building without following due process of law. Hence, this writ petition is filed. This Court, on 08.07.2009, directed the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition to produce the relevant record to show that the directions given by this Court in earlier writ petition No.6056 of 2008 dated 16.12.2008 are complied with and an opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner. Today, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner was given an opportunity of personal hearing in pursuance of the directions given by this Court in W.P.No.6056 of 2008 dated 16.12.2008 and the same is evident from the statement of the petitioner sworn to on 22.01.2009, a copy of which finds place in the material papers filed along with the writ petition. In the aforesaid sworn statement, the petitioner deposed as under: “In view of the Hon’ble High Court orders dt.16-12-2008 in WP.No.6056/08, I have filed my objections and personal hearing has been granted on 22-1-09 by the Spl. Dy. Collector, Land Acquisition (Genl), Hyderabad for pleading objections. I have no objection to part with land upto compound wall from the Centre of the road because inside the compound wall, water sump, septic tank and bore well are existing. There is no other place left to accommodate them elsewhere.” In view of the above, the contention of the petitioner that he was not afforded with an opportunity of personal hearing as per the directions of this Court in W.P.No.6056 of 2008 dated 16.12.2008 and that his objections were not considered cannot be accepted. Thus, I do not find any merits in the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________ N.V.RAMANA,J 13.07.2009 v v