THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23631 of 2006 Date: 05.02.2008 Between: Bh. Suryakantamma & others. … Petitioners AND The District Collector, Eluru, West Godavari District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri C. Ramachandra Raju Counsel for the respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION. No.23631 of 2006 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “… … Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing the notification dated 08.06.2006 under Section 4(1) and the notification dated 11.09.2006 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act are without jurisdiction, contrary to Section 4(1), 5A and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act suffers from non-application of mind, arbitrary, malafide violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and pas such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” At the hearing, Sri C. Ramachandra Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners passed on additional affidavit filed by petitioner No.1, wherein it is mentioned as under: “I submit that after issuance of the impugned notification, the respondents have acquired alternative land of an extent of Ac.300 cts. In addition to that Ac.3.00, the respondents wanted to acquire 2 more acres and in that regard they have identified the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.2.84 cents in S.Nos.23/3, 25/3 and 154/2A of Vendra Village, belonging to one Sri M. Ranga Raju, M. Krishnaveni and G. John. The owners of the land have given their consent to the respondents for acquisition of their land and the respondents are going to acquire the land very shortly. Therefore, in view of the acquisition of equal extent of alternative land, the respondents have no necessity to acquire our land and our land shall be de-notified.” Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition on instructions affirmed the contents of para 2 of the affidavit reproduced above as correct and stated that in view of securing alternative land, the respondents are not proposing to acquire any part of the land belonging to the petitioner and notified for acquisition. The statement of the learned Assistant Government Pleader is placed of record and the writ petition is closed. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.No.30132 of 2006 and WVMP.No.59 of 2007 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 05.02.2008 ES