IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 20361 of 2008 Between: Mohd Ismail S/o.Late Abdul Khadar H.No.13-3-33 Mustaidpura Karwan Sahu Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep.by its the Commissioner Tank Bund Hyderabad 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep.by the Assistant City Planner,Circle No.III Abids Hyderabad 3 The Special Deputy Collector office of the Land Acquisitions Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation 6th Floor Municipal Complex Tank Bund Hyderabad. 4 Mr.Mohd Yousuf S/o Late Mohd Abdul Khader H.No.3-6-111/1 to 3 Himayathnagar Main Road Hyderabad .....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 an appropriate orders direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings bearing No.AA/1400/2007 dt 5-9-2008 issued by the respondent No 3 as arbitrary illegal, violative of principles of natural justice apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner and issue consequential direction to the respondent No.3 not to give effect to the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.ANUP KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, the ﬁrst respondent herein, initiated proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for acquiring certain properties, for widening of a road, from Liberty Junction to Himayathnagar. A Mulgi in 3-6-111/2, Himayathnagar was also aﬀected. Notiﬁcations under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act were published and thereafter, award enquiry was taken up. Notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was issued on 05.09.2008. The petitioner states that though himself and his brother, the fourth respondent herein, are the joint owners, he was not put on notice at any stage of the proceedings. He further states that much before the acquisition proceedings, he got issued several notices bringing to the notice of respondents 1 to 3, his claim and right vis-à-vis the property. He also states that the notice, dated 05.09.2008, is illegal and violative of principles of natural justice. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. It may be true that the petitioner has submitted representations to respondents 1 to 3 indicating his claim vis-à-vis the property, on sensing that it would be aﬀected in the road widening. The fact, however, remains that he did not submit any claim or representation, in response to the notiﬁcations under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act, much less, in the award enquiry. The notice, dated 05.09.2008, was issued under Section 12(2) of the Act calling upon the parties to vacate the premises on 08.09.2008. If the petitioner is so advised, he can submit a claim petition under Section 18 of the Act, duly indicating his claim, be it for enhancement or apportionment of the compensation. This Court is not able to ﬁnd any legal or factual error in the acquisition proceedings. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy under Section 18 of the Act. In case the compensation has not been paid to the fourth respondent as yet, the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer shall defer the same for a period of two weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:18.09.2008 Note: Issue cc in two days. (B/o) kdl