IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28575 of 2007 Between: 1 Masjid Committee, Mir-Mahaboob Ali Society, Jalpalli, Saroorngar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District rep byits President, Liaquat Ali Khan s/o Mahboob Ali Khan 56 years. 2 Liaquat Ali Khan S/o Mahboob Ali khan R/o Jalpalli, Saroorngar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 3 Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), International Air Port, Shamshabad O/o Collectorate, R.R. District, 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 a Writ or Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, order or Orders, direction or Directions declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the objections filed by the petitioners U/s. 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act in so far as saving the 1st petitioner Mosque situated in Sy. no. 67/1, Jalpalli Village, Saroornagar Mandal, R.R. District by laying the proposed 150 Feet road without effecting the Western Portion of the Mosque as arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional and to issue a Consequential direction to the Respondents to lay the road in a manner without effecting the Western Portion of the 1st petitioner mosque in view of the availability of the Government land in adjoining Sy. No. 62 and pass such other order and orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28575 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the objections filed by the petitioners under Sec.5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) in order to save petitioner No.1 Mosque, comprised in Sy.No.67/1 of Jalpalli village, Saroornagar Mandal, R.R.District in laying the proposed 150 feet road, as illegal. This writ petition underwent many adjournments. On 31.12.2007 while issuing notice, this Court passed the following order: “Since an Award has already been passed and the petitioner has not taken steps to question the order by which their objections filed under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were rejected, I am not inclined to grant an interim order at this stage. However, I observe that if there is any possibility of proceeding with the work of laying of the road by excluding the portion occupied by the alleged mosque, the respondents may consider such a possibility.” Subsequently, the respondents filed a counter and both parties filed voluminous material in support of their respective stands. The petitioner claimed that the proposed road can be aligned in such a way without affecting the building which is allegedly a Mosque. The respondents have taken the stand that the building in question is not a Mosque and that the petitioners raised a pillar showing it as a Minaret. In this view, I am proposing to take in this case, there is no need to go into these disputed and controversial issues. At the hearing, Sri V.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that in principle the petitioners have no objection for giving away the land for road widening, but according to him, the same extent of land, belonging to the petitioners which is proposed to be acquired, can be acquired without touching the existing structure. Learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Land Acquisition says that such a course is not possible in view of final fixation of alignment and execution of the work on either side of the structure. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that interests of justice would be met, if the respondents consider the claim of the petitioners, and if they are satisfied that without changing the alignment, the structure in question can be saved, they shall consider the feasibility of the request of the petitioners. If, on the other hand, they find that the proposal of the petitioners cannot be accepted, they shall be free to go ahead with the work, in accordance with the alignment already finalized. In the event the respondents accept the first mentioned course, they are given liberty to modify the award, already passed. The petitioner No.2 shall appear before respondent No.3, within one week from today. There upon, respondent No.3 shall fix a date for hearing him. After giving petitioner No.2 an opportunity of hearing, respondent No.3 shall take a decision. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated: 25.02.2008 Dsr