THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.4365 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioners, who claim to be the residents of Gudikal Village, Kurnool District, filed the present writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proposing to acquire their respective lands for the purpose of extension of Summer Storage Tank at Yemmiganur. The petitioners state that they are small farmers, that their source of livelihood is agriculture and that they have no other lands, except the lands proposed to the acquired under the subject acquisition proceedings. They also state that on an earlier occasion, W.P.No.22969 of 1998 was filed questioning the action of the second respondent in dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), which was disposed of by this Court on 30.12.2004 directing the respondents to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Thereafter, pursuant to the notice issued by the respondents, the petitioners claim to have submitted their objections duly enclosing relevant material along with alternative proposals seeking to drop further proceedings. While so, it is the grievance of the petitioners that without properly appreciating the objections raised by them during the course of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, the second respondent, namely, the District Collector, Kurnool, issued notification, dated 28.07.2005, authorizing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District, the third respondent herein, to take possession of the subject lands. Hence, the present writ petition. This Court, while issuing Rule nisi, on 07.03.2006 recorded the submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition that the respondents would maintain status quo as on that day with regard to taking over possession of the lands in question. Subsequently, the respondents filed counter in the matter denying the allegations made by the petitioners. In the counter, while dealing with the various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that the Executive Engineer, Public Health, Kurnool submitted a requisition to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni vide letter, dated 04.05.1996, for acquisition of land to an extent of Acs.104.40 (after preparation of sub-divisions, the extent of land is Acs.95.85) of Yemmiganur and Gudikal Villages for extension of Summer Storage Tank at Yemmiganur. Pursuant thereto, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni submitted draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act as well as draft Declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act to the District Collector, Kurnool invoking urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act by dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. It is stated that at that stage, some of the land owners filed writ petitions and pursuant to the directions of this Court in the said writ petitions, notices under Section 5-A of the Act were issued to all the land owners, including the petitioners herein, calling upon them to raise their objections, if any. Thereupon, the petitioners submitted their objections on 28.02.2005. After considering the same and upon perusing the report of the Land Acquisition Officer, the District Collector vie proceedings, dated 28.06.2005, rejected the objections raised stating that they are not tenable. It is categorically stated in the counter that as the objections raised by the petitioners are untenable and the lands are sought to be acquired for a public purpose, after completion of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, fresh draft declaration proposals were submitted and the same were approved by the District Collector, Kurnool on 28.07.2005. Thereafter, the draft declaration was also published in the District Gazette and other newspapers as contemplated under the Act. Subsequently, notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act were also issued to the petitioners to attend the award enquiry on 27.02.2006. Though petitioner Nos.4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 have received the said notices, petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 12 refused to receive the same and as such, notices were affixed on the doors of their houses. But, they failed to attend the award enquiry on 27.02.2006. After completion of award enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award on 09.04.2007 and issued notices under Section 12(2) of the Act to receive the compensation. It is stated that petitioner Nos.5, 7 & 12 have received compensation in respect of their lands, whereas other petitioners have not turned up and therefore, the remaining compensation amount was kept in ‘Revenue Deposits’. But, however, it is stated that in view of filing of the present writ petition, the respondents could not take possession of the subject lands. Thus, the respondents sought dismissal of the writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents. At the outset, it is to be noted that the subject lands of the petitioners were sought to be acquired by the respondents for the purpose of extension of Summer Storage Tank at Yemmiganur. Though the petitioners sought to oppose the subject acquisition proceedings on various grounds and sought to contend that there is no necessity to acquire the subject lands, the fact remains that the subject acquisition proceedings are intended for a public purpose i.e., extension of Summer Storage Tank at Yemmiganur. It is categorically stated in the counter that the population in Yemmiganur Municipality has increased two-fold and it has become very difficult to supply the drinking water through the existing Summer Storage Tank and in view of dire necessity for increasing the existing Summer Storage Tank to avoid hardship in supplying drinking water to the people of Yemmiganur Municipality, the respondents have undertaken the subject acquisition proceedings. Further, it is a matter for the Executive to take decision depending upon the necessity and this Court cannot substitute its opinion, as the proposed acquisition is for a public purpose. Apart from that, some of the petitioners have already received compensation. In the circumstances, the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:23.03.2010 VGB