THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26279 of 2007 Date: 31.01.2008 Between: Raatnala Tirupataiah and others … Petitioners AND The District Collector, Guntur and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26279 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare notification, dated 11.06.2007 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) and declaration, dated 14.11.2007 issued under Section 6 of the Act, whereby the land of the petitioners comprised in Survey No.80 of Kothapalem Village, H/o Kondaveedu, Guntur District is proposed to be acquired, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Heard Sri B.Chinnapa Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The land admeasuring Ac.1.16 cents of Kothapalem Village, H/o Kondaveedu, Yedlapadu Mandal, Guntur District, was proposed to be acquired by the respondents. In response to the notice issued by respondent No.2, the petitioners have filed their objections. The objections were considered by respondent No.2 and by order, dated 23.10.2007, they were rejected. At the hearing, it has come out that respondent No.1 is the authority delegated with the power of the appropriate Government under Section 5A of the Act to consider and dispose of the objections of the landowners. Though the petitioners have not raised this issue specifically in this petition, since this aspect goes to the root of the matter inasmuch as the very jurisdiction of respondent No.2 in passing the order is in question, I felt it appropriate to decide this writ petition on this issue. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition fairly conceded that respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to decide the objections of the landowners and that it is only respondent No.1, who is competent to do so. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed without going into the merits of the case. Order dated 23.10.2007 passed by respondent No.2 and declaration, dated 14.11.2007 issued under Section 6 of the Act are set aside. Respondent No.1 is left free to consider the objections of the petitioners in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon before proceeding further with the proposed acquisition. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 31st JANUARY, 2008 kvni