THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14175 of 2003 Dated:19.08.2009 Between: Chintala Sahadevudu. ….Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad, And another. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.14175 of 2003 ORDER: The petitioner is statedly the owner of land admeasuring Ac.0.32 cents in survey No.495/C, and Ac.1.91 cents in survey No.80/2B of Kondamanjuluru Village, J.Pangaluru Mandal in Prakasam District. Alleging that the land was acquired by the respondents for provision of house sites without paying adequate compensation, he got issued a legal notice on 26.12.2002 seeking a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity). He also issued another legal notice on 22.05.2003 in respect of the land comprised in survey No.495/C. As there was no response, he filed the instant writ petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the land admeasuring Ac.0.32 cents in survey No.495/C was acquired for widening National Highway No.5, and therefore, he does not press the writ petition insofar as the said item is concerned. Insofar as the other item of land admeasuring Ac.1.91 cents in survey No.80/2B is concerned, learned Counsel submits that the petitioner has not received any notice of Award and that he was not present when the Award was passed by the second respondent. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed before this Court the original file from the Office of the second respondent. At page No.273 of CF, a copy of the notice under Section 12(2) of the Act with acknowledgement of the petitioner is found. This would clinchingly show that notice of Award dated 04.05.2002 was served on the petitioner on 15.06.2002. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that even if a notice is said to be issued, the same is not accompanied by the copy of the Award, and therefore, it is not a valid notice. Section 12(2) of the Act does not stricto senso contemplate the service of Award and it requires the Land Acquisition Officer to give notice of Award to the persons interested. Even otherwise, when the notice of Award was served on the petitioner, he ought to have approached the Land Acquisition Officer for further details. He did not do so, and got issued notice on 26.12.2002 beyond the time prescribed under Section 18(2) of the Act for seeking reference. The Writ Petition, for the above reasons, is misconceived, and the same is dismissed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 19.08.2009 vs