IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4232 of 2008 Between: Gaddam Naraya Reddy S/o. Linga Reddy R/o. Pipparwada village, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Adilabad, Adilabad district. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer & LAO, Adilabad Division, Adilabad District. 3 The Tahsildar, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad 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 a writ, order of direction, more particularly a writ of Mandamus declaring the notification issued by the respondents under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and declaration under section 6 of the act which was published vide No. B/2213/2007, dated 18/12/2007 by the urgency clause under section 17(4) and dispending with the procedure contemplated under section 5-A of the L./A.Act though there are other lands available for the acquisition as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of principles of natural justice, null and viod and violation of articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the law and may be pleased to set aside the same in the interest of justice and consequently not to dispossess the petitioner from the lands to an extent of Ac.1.28 gts. in Sy.No.28/2, situated at Pipparwada Village, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SURENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KSRANI} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4232 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to quash Notification dated 18.12.2007, issued under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) and declaration, dated Nil, issued under Sec.6 of the Act, whereby the petitioner’s land of an extent of Ac.1.28 cents, comprised in Sy.No.28/2 of Pipparwada village, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District, is proposed to be acquired. Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Land Acquisition and perused the record. A perusal of the record shows that the above mentioned extent is proposed to be acquired for public purpose, namely, for provision of house sites to persons belonging to weaker sections. The record also reveals that the provisions of Sec.17(4) are invoked and enquiry under Sec.5-A is dispensed with. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Land Acquisition, I am of the view that respondent No.1 is not justified in dispensing with enquiry under Sec.5-A, because the purpose, namely, provision of house sites for weaker sections is not so urgent in nature, which does not brook the delay in holding enquiry under Sec.5-A. The provision of Sec.5-A provides for valuable opportunity for landowners to raise objections against the proposed acquisition and such a valuable right cannot be taken away in a casual manner, irrespective of whether urgency is involved or not. In view of the above, the impugned notification, to the extent of dispensing with enquiry under Sec.5-A, is quashed, and declaration issued under Sec.6, is also declared as invalid. The respondents are directed to hold enquiry by giving the petitioner an opportunity of filing objections and participating in the enquiry before seeking to proceed further. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated: 28.02.2008 Dsr Note: Issue copy in three days. B/o Dsr