IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25402 of 2007 Between: Padala Veera Raghava Reddy and another ..... PETITIONERS AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25402 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to invalidate the acquisition proceedings initiated by Notification dated 15.11.2006 and published on 23.11.2006, issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), whereby an extent of Ac.4.33 cents of land in Sy.No.228/1A of Balabhadrapuram village of Biccavole Mandal, East Godavari District is proposed to be acquired. Heard Sri M.Srinivas, representing the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Asst.Govt.Pleader for Land Acquisition. By the impugned notification issued under Sec.4(1), the above mentioned extent of land belonging to the petitioners is proposed to be acquired. In response to the notice issued under Sec.5-A, the petitioners filed their objections. Subsequently on the basis of the report submitted by respondent No.3, respondent No.2 vide his order dated 03.11.2007 rejected the said objections. At the time of hearing, the only contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were denied the opportunity of personal hearing by respondent No.3. In the counter affidavit filed by Sri M.Jitendra, the Revenue Divisional Officer and Land Acquisition Officer, Rajahmundry, respondent No.3, it is averred as under: “Notice under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 17-11-2006 asking the Land Owner to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer on 18-12-2006 and raise objections, if any, on acquisition. The landowners appeared before the Land Acquisition Officer and submitted their objections against the acquisition. The objections filed by the Land owners have been enquired into and the Revenue Divisional Officer & Land Acquisition Officer, Rajahmundry, found that the objections are not tenable and accordingly 5-A enquiry report was submitted to the District Collector, East Godavari, Kakinada. Thereafter the Collector has taken a decision on the 5-A enquiry report and issued proceedings dated 03.11.2007 rejecting the objections of the petitioners and the said proceedings were communicated to the petitioners on 12-11-2007. After completion of 5-A enquiry, Draft Declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was approved by the District Collector, East Godavari, Kakinada.” The petitioners have not filed any rejoinder controverting the above reproduced averments. Except the ipse dixit of the petitioners that they were not given any opportunity of personal hearing, they have not substantiated the same. In the absence of the petitioners controverting the averments contained in the counter affidavit, I have no reason to disbelieve that the petitioners personally submitted their objections on 18.12.2006 and respondent No.3 enquired into the same. Therefore, I do not see any reason to interdict further proceeding by the respondents to acquire the petitioners’ lands. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not argued any other point. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel of dismissal of this writ petition, WPMP.33113/2007 stands dismissed as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated: 05.02.2008 Dsr