IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.13620 of 2009 Between: Anjuman-e-Mahafijul Islam, (Regd.No.583/90), Opposite N.H. Veg. Market, Eluru - 534 001, W.G. District rep. by its Secretary, Md. Sadiq. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Land Acquisition Officer & Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, W.G. District. 2 Executive Engineer (R&B), West Godavari Division, Eluru, W.G. District. 3 A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad, rep. by its Chief Executive Officer. .....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 any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 1st respondent in Roc.No.G2/6201/2008 General dated 30.01.2009 as published in the Telugu Newspaper, Andhra Jyothi dated 09.02.2009 as illegal and void in so far as it declares to acquire the Durgah land of extent of 48 sq. yards situated in S.No.55/3 of Eluru Town, West Godavari District and consequently quash the same and restrain the respondents from acquiring the land of Hazarath Syed Rahamath Darga in S.No.55/3 of Eluru Town, West Godavari District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for Respondent No.2: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS Counsel for Respondent No.3: MR. SHAFAT AHMED KHAN, SC The Court made the following: ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the action of the 1st respondent in proposing to acquire the land in an extent of 48 square yards in Sy.No.55/3 of Eluru Town, West Godavari District, for public purpose, on the ground that in the said land, there exists a Darga of Saint Hazarath Syed Rahamath Alishah Quadri, a notified Wakf institution, and acquisition of the same would hurt the sentiments of Muslim as well as Hindu devotees, and, therefore, the petitioner seeks that the said portion of the land, wherein the Darga is situated, may be directed to be excluded from the acquisition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent No.1, the learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings appearing for respondent No.2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3. According to the own admission of the petitioner, notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for shot ‘the Act’) was issued, and thereafter, enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted, in which the petitioner participated and raised objections, and thereafter declaration under Section 6 of the Act and notice under Section 9 of the Act were also published. Further according to the petitioner, respondent No.2- Executive Engineer (R & B), West Godavari Division, vide letter dated 29.12.2008, had assured the 1st respondent that they will not touch the Darga while laying the road, unless it is found inevitable. Despite such assurance, the petitioner apprehending that the respondents will lay the road over the Darga, has filed the present writ petition. Since in the impugned acquisition, the respondents have followed the procedure contemplated under the Act and have also called for the objections of the petitioner, no directions, as prayed for by the petitioner, can be granted, particularly, when respondent No.2, for whose purpose the land is acquired and who is said to be laying the road, had assured that the Darga would be spared as far as possible. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move the respondents in the event respondent No.2 goes back by his assurance. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 9th July, 2009 IBL