IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 27277 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt.Madhura Vani W/o. Sri Krishna Prasad R/o. Visakhapatnam. 2 Sri.P.Suryanarayana Rao S/o.P.Krishna Prasad R/o.Visakhapatnam, presently staying in USA. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Collector, Krishna District, Vijayawada Municipality. 2 The Sub-Collector, Krishna District, Vijayawada Municipality. .....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, direction or orders one in the nature of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Notification issued Under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 published in "Andhra Jyothi" Daily on 24.11.2008, wherein the lands of the petitioners admeasuring Ac.04.33 cents comprising of 79 cents in Survey No. 104/2 and 86 cents in Survey No. 104/3 and Ac.02.68 cents in Survey No. 104/6 which are sought to be acquired and quash the same as the same is contrary to the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and in violation of Article -300A of Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.GUMMALA.VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioners’ grievance, in short, is that belated service of notice on them on 13.12.2008, informing that an enquiry under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) would be held on 15.12.2008, had resulted in their not having enough time to file their objections. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, on instructions, would submit that since nobody attended the hearing under Section 5-A of the Act, the enquiry has been postponed to 23.12.2008. Since the petitioners now has a week’s time, it is open for them to submit their objections and participate in the enquiry to be held on 23.12.2008. Sri Gummalla Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, would further contend that the respondents had come over to the petitioners’ land and had made markings thereon. He would express apprehension that the petitioners may be dispossessed from the lands in question even before completion of the Section 5-A enquiry. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition would state that since a notice under Section 5-A has already been issued, the question of the petitioners being dispossessed from the lands in question without a decision being taken under Section 5-A of the Act, and without awarding compensation did not arise. Recording the submission made on behalf of the respondents by the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, and as it is evident that the petitioners’ apprehension regarding their being dispossessed from the lands in question is without basis, I see no reason to interdict the respondents from proceeding with the land acquisition proceedings. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners shall be entitled to file their objections to the notice under Section 5-A of the Act before 23.12.2008 and to be personally heard in the enquiry to be held on that date. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date: 16.12.2008 sj