IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 3474 of 2009 Between: 1 K.Ramakrishna Reddy S/o.K.Nagireddy R/o.81-342-A, Sainath nagar, Gooty Road Kurnool 2 K.Surendranath Reddy S/o.K.Ramakrishna Reddy R/o.81-342-A, Sainath Nagar Gooty Road Kurnool 3 M.D.Y,Ramamurthy S/o.M.D.Ramayyah R/o.6787, Fort Kurnool 4 J.Satyarangaiah S/o.J.Chinna Rangaiah R/o.81/337, Sri Balaji Nagar Gooty Road, B.Camp, Kurnool ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of India., rep.byi ts Secretary ,Dept of Road Transport and High Ways, Ministry of Shipping and Surface Transport, New Delhi 2 The Joint Collector Kurnool-cum-Competent Authority Under National Highways Act, 1956, Kurnool 3 The District Collector, Kurnool 4 The Thasildar, Kallur, Kurnool .....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 writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering by threat of demolition and dispossession of the petitioners from the property in Plot No.14,15 and 16 including the existing shop building bearing D.No.81/342, of SY.No.601./1 of Kallur Village situated to adjacent to N.H.7 leading from Kurnool to Gooty within the limits of Sainath nagar, Kallur Mandal, of Kurnool town without any due process of law as highly arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and in violation of provisions of National High Way Act, 1956 and consequently to direct the second respondent to decide the claim-cum- objection submitted by the petitioners on 15.9.2005 in accordance with sec.3(2) of National High Way Act, in the event of any valid notification in terms of Sec.3(1) of the said statute which is in force in accordance with law with due opportunity of being heard. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI B.NARASIMHA SARMA Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.3474 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in threatening to demolish and dispossess the petitioners from Plot Nos.14,15 and 16, including the existing shop building bearing D.No.81/342 of Sy.No.601/1 of Kallur village situated adjacent to N.H.7 leading from Kurnool to Gooty within the limits of Sainathnagar, Kallur village of Kurnool town, without following due process of law, as arbitrary and illegal. There is no necessity of going into all the details. This Court, on 26.02.2009, while ordering notice before admission, directed status quo obtaining as on that day to be maintained by the parties, and the said order is being extended from time to time. Now, a vacate petition is filed seeking to vacate the said interim order. A counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.1, wherein, at paragraph 7, it is stated that the N.H.A.I (National Highway Authority of India) would follow the due procedure as enumerated under the National Highways Act, 1956, for acquisition of the land and that, without following the procedure, the N.H.A.I would not enter into anybody’s land forcibly. It is further stated that, in the present case, the land in question was already acquired under Award No.5/69, dated 28.03.1969, and, therefore, the question of issuance of notice does not arise. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though the petitioners made representation on 15.09.2005 and 21.06.2008 to the 2nd respondent, the Joint Collector-cum-Competent Authority Under National Highways Act, 1956, Kurnool, ventilating their grievances, the same have not been acted upon. In reply, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection for considering the said representations purported to have been made by the petitioners and passing appropriate orders as per law. In view of the aforesaid submissions, without expressing any opinion on merits, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the representations dated 15.09.2005 and 21.06.2008 purported to have been filed by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, as per law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioners. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 21.04.2009 v v