THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.161 of 2007 ORDER: The District Collector, Krishna, 1st respondent herein published notification, dated 11.07.2006, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’) proposing to acquire Ac.1.53 cents of land in Tenner Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District, for the purpose of providing house sites to the persons belonging to Backward Classes in Madduru Village. The land admeasuring Ac.1.47 cents owned by the petitioner was also included. Section 17(4) of the Act was invoked and enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with. The petitioner filed W.P.No.15149 of 2006 feeling aggrieved by the said notifications. The writ petition was disposed of on 24.07.2006 directing that enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act be held. A notice inviting objections under Section 5-A of the Act was issued by the Land Acquisition Officer, 2nd respondent herein. The petitioner submitted representations/objections. Through an endorsement, dated 22.12.2006, the 2nd respondent rejected the objections and observed that there is no other alternative except to proceed with the acquisition. The petitioner challenges the various proceedings referred to above. It is stated that the 2nd respondent does not have jurisdiction to conduct enquiry much less to take a final decision under Section 5-A(2) of the Act. The respondents filed a counter affidavit stating inter alia that though the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted by the 2nd respondent, a final decision was taken by the 1st respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. The respondents initially proposed to acquire the land by dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. With the intervention by this Court, conducting of enquiry became inevitable. Section 5-A of the Act stipulates broad guidelines to be followed in the context of holding enquiry thereunder. A perusal of sub-section (2) thereof discloses that it is the Collector that must conduct the enquiry and submit a report to the appropriate Government. Assuming that since notification is issued by the District Collector, he can be equated to the appropriate Government; it may become permissible for the Land Acquisition Officer to conduct enquiry. However, in such cases also, the ultimate decision in the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act must be taken by the District Collector, who has issued the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. In the instant case, the 2nd respondent i.e., Land Acquisition Officer has not only conducted the enquiry but also took the final decision on the objections raised by the petitioners. The same is evident from the endorsement, dated 22.12.2006. It is not the report submitted to the District Collector. On the other hand, it is a specific order dealing with the objections and rejecting the same. Therefore, there is a serious defect in the enquiry conducted under Section 5-A of the Act. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and the endorsement dated 22.12.2006 is set aside. It is directed that the same shall be treated as a report submitted to the District Collector and he in turn shall take further steps in the matter. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 02.06.2010 JSU THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.161 of 2007 Date: 02.06.2010 JSU