HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO W.P.NO. 24998 OF 2000 DATED: 18.1.2008 Between: C. Swarna and others … Petitioners and The District Collector and Magistrate, Collectorate, Maharanipet, Visakhapatnam And another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO W.P.NO. 24998 OF 2000 ORAL ORDER: The petitioners, who are four in number, are statedly owners of land admeasuring ACS. 6.18 in R.S.No.42/5 and R.S.No.43, situated at Kurmannapalem Village of Visakhapatnam District. The 2nd respondent proposed to acquire the land for provision of house-sites to poor. A notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘the Act’ for brevity) was published in the Gazette on 22.7.1984. The said notification was assailed by the petitioners in W.P.No.6266 of 1986. When the matter was pending, the 2nd respondent passed an Award dated 2.6.1986. In view of this, the said writ petition was dismissed by this court on 6.11.1993. Subsequently, they also filed W.P.No.5753 of 2000 challenging the Form (9) notice under the Act, directing the petitioners to handover possession. The same was also dismissed on 7.4.2000. Thereafter, they approached the 2nd respondent to refer the Award to Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act, in vain. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus: (a) declaring the action of the respondents in not referring the Award under Section 18 of the Act, as illegal and arbitrary and; (b) to direct the respondents to forthwith make a reference. A counter affidavit is filed opposing the writ petition. Inter alia, it is stated as below: “… I respectfully submit that VUDA issued Notification u/s 4 (1) under the Land Acquisition Act (for brevity herein referred to as L.A. Act) for acquiring an extent of Ac.24.80 cts in Block No.27 of Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam for a Public Purpose of Sites and Services Scheme. The Petitioners herein filed W.P.No.6266/1986 challenging the said Notification u/s 4(1) of the L.A. Act dt. 27-7-84 for their land of an extent of Ac.2.85 cts in Sy.No.42/5 and Ac.3.33 cts in Sy.No.43 totaling Ac.6.18 cts. The Hon’ble Court by an order dt.6-11-93 was pleased to uphold the validity of Notification u/s 4 (1) and also Award No.7/86 dt.26- 5-86. There was a categorical averment by VUDA in the counter filed in W.P.No.6266/1986 that notices u/s 12 of the L.A. Act were sent to the Petitioners on the same day of the passing of the Award and that the petitioners have evaded to receive the said notices which were returned unserved on 2-6-86. Accordingly, this Hon’ble Court has perused the relevant records produced by the Learned Standing Counsel at Hyderabad during the hearing of W.P.No.6266/86 and this Hon’ble Court held that the records contain copies of the notices sent u/s 12.” Though the counter affidavit is filed before this Court on 29.8.2002, no reply affidavit is filed denying the above counter averment. This only shows that the allegations of the respondents that Award notice under Section 12 (2) of the Act was sent to the petitioners and they evaded to receive the same, stands unrebutted. In view of this, the application made by the petitioners seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act is belated and cannot be accepted. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. V.V.S. RAO, J Date: 18.1.2008 cvm