IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 27520 of 2008 Between: Surapaneni Shiva Rama Krishna Prasad, S/o. Venkata Ramaiah, R/o. Bridavan Colony, Labbipet, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Krishna District. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Nuzuvidu Division, Krishna District. .....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 order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents proposing to acquire the petitioners agricultural double crop wet land in an extent of Ac. 2.50 cents in Sy.No. 139 (part) situated Unguturu Village, Unguturu Mandal, by issuing notification in Rc. No. G4/3852/2008 dt. 7-11- 2008 published under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is highly arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the availability of the alternative lands in the Village for the purpose of distributing house sites to weaker section in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MRP.RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 27520 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the proposed acquisition of the petitioner’s land in an extent of Acs.2.50 cents situated in Sy.No.139 of Unguturu Village and Mandal vide notification dated 07-11-2008 published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) is arbitrary and illegal. It is primarily contended by the petitioner that the impugned acquisition for the purpose of providing house sites to weaker sections is unwarranted and unjustified since the land in question is a double crop wet land and that apart alternative Gramakantam land is available in the locality. However, it is admitted by the petitioner that he has already submitted his objections before the second respondent, who is the competent authority to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition under instructions stated that the objections raised by all the persons interested would be considered in accordance with law before proceeding further. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioner dated 08-12-2008 following the procedure prescribed under the Act and pass appropriate orders, before taking any further steps pursuant to the impugned notification. A copy of such order shall be communicated to the petitioners and the possession of the land in question shall not be taken without following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 23-12-2008 Note: Issue C.c. in 3 days. B/o KLP