THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.610 of 2009 ORDER : This Writ Petition can be disposed of on a short ground that the objections filed by some of the Writ Petitioners under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act have not been considered, though mandatory in law. The lands of the petitioners which are said to be situated in various survey numbers of Chinaravuru Village, Tenali Mandal, Guntur District were proposed to be acquired pursuant to a Draft Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act published in the Guntur District Gazette No.72, dated 13-06-2008. By orders of the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.822, dated 16-07-1985, the Revenue Divisional Officer was appointed to perform the functions of Collector under Section 5-A of the Act. Objections were invited by a notice dated 09-07-2008 from the interested persons in respect of the proposed acquisition. In pursuance of the same, all the petitioners submitted their objections separately to the Land Acquisition Officer. It appears that hearing of the objections was conducted on 30-07-2008 and out of 8 petitioners, only petitioner No.7 appeared for personal hearing. Pursuant to the said enquiry, the 1st Respondent-Collector passed orders thereon in Rc.No.4034/08/G2, dated 31-12-2008 overruling the objections. The petitioners in this writ petition are challenging the said orders, besides challenging the aforesaid Draft Notification also. As mentioned earlier, there is no need to go into the legality of the Draft Notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Act, which in fact has not been pursued during the course of the argument. Suffice it to note that wherever enquiry is contemplated under Section 5-A of the Act any person interested in the land notified under the Draft Notification may object to such acquisition, provided the objection has been made within 30 days of causing public notice. Every such objection made shall be taken cognizance and the objector shall be given an opportunity of being heard in person or any person authorised by him in this behalf. Only after hearing such objections and after making further enquiry, if necessary, the Collector shall make a report to the appropriate Government along with his recommendations on the objections together with the record of proceedings for the decision of the said appropriate Government. It is therefore obligatory on the part of the Land Acquisition Officer to take into consideration the objections made and submit a report for an appropriate decision to the concerned authority. In the instant case in the counter-affidavit filed by the 2nd Respondent it has been admitted that all the petitioners submitted their objections during the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. If that be so, it is incumbent upon him to have considered the same and sent the report along with his recommendations to the District Collector for taking eventual decision thereupon. Indisputably as is evident from a perusal of the impugned order dated 31-12-2008, the 2nd Respondent has not considered the objections filed by petitioners 1 to 4. Even the District Collector while taking a decision does not appear to have considered the said objections of the petitioners 1 to 4. It is true that it is for the appropriate authority to consider whether the objections raised are valid and tenable, but the same does not discharge the authority from its obligation to consider the objections altogether. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am inclined to direct the 2nd Respondent to consider the objections submitted by the petitioners and submit an appropriate report to the District Collector for his eventual decision. It is true that although the objections of the petitioners 5 to 8 were said to have been considered, but a perusal of the orders dated 31-12-2008 would show that all the objections raised by them have not been met. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed to the extent of challenge to the orders of the 1st Respondent in Rc.No.4034/08/G2, dated 31-12-2008 insofar as petitioners are concerned and set aside the same. The matter is remanded to the 1st Respondent with a direction to consider the objections of all the petitioners and pass fresh order. This exercise shall be completed as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 06th April, 2011. skmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.610 of 2009 Date : 06-04-2011 Between : Paladugu Seetharamaiah & 7 Others .. Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the District Collector, Guntur District & 2 Others .. Respondents