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 : 27437 of 2008 Between: M/s Srinivasa Real Estate Neelamani Nagar Opp MRO Office Main Road Pathapatnam Sirkakulam District Rep.by its Managing Partner Sri G.Babu Rao S/o Late Krishna Murthy Hindu Bobbili ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh rep.by its Principal Secretary to Govt of Revenue Department(Land Acquisition) Secretariat Hyderabad 2 The District Collector Srikakulam,Srikakulam District 3 The Special Deputy Collector(Land Acquisition) Unit-II B.R.R.(Vamsadhara) Project Hiramandam Sri Kakulam 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 or direction particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the notification issued by the 2nd respondent herein under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition act vide Rc No.2073/2008/G3 dt 11-8-2008 and published in "process Vision" telugu daily dt 29-08-2008 which is not a widely circulated news paper and also the consequential notice issued by the 3rd respondent herein under Section 5- A of the Land Acquisition Act issued in furtherance of Section 4(1) notification as arbitrary malafide illegal and unconstitutional being in violation of Articles 14,19 and 300-A of the constitution of India and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.V.SUBRAHMANYA NARUSU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 27437 of 2008 O R D E R : The petitioner is a partnership firm, which claims to have acquired Ac.18.74 cents of land situated in Sy.Nos.99, 127, 128 and 129 situated at Neelamani Nagar Village, Pathapatnam Mandal, Srikakulam District under a registered document dated 18-09- 2007 as well as different agreements of sale. This writ petition is filed challenging the notification dated 11.8.2008 published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act’) for acquiring the land in question along with various other extents for the purpose of rehabilitation of the displaced persons under the Hiramandalam Reservoir. It is contended by the petitioner that the proposed acquisition is unwarranted and unjustified since the land in question is situated far away from the Hiramandalam Reservoir. The petitioner also raised several other contentions opposing the proposed acquisition. These are all the aspects which require consideration in the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. A perusal of the impugned notification shows that the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act has not been invoked and consequently, the respondents are bound to conduct the enquiry. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, under instructions, stated that as a matter of fact, such enquiry has already been conducted and the objections raised by all the persons have been considered. However, learned Government Pleader did not dispute the fact that the declaration under Section 6 of the Act has not yet been made. Having regard to the fact that the declaration under Section 6 of the Act has not yet been made and the petitioner claims to be a person interested, without expressing any opinion on merits, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to submit its objections within a period of one week from today. If any such objections are received, the same shall be considered by the second respondent and appropriate order be passed before proceeding further. There shall also be a direction not to take possession of the land in question pursuant to the impugned notification without following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 23-12-2008 Note: Issue C.C. tomorrow. B/o KLP