HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.10158 of 2007 21.01.2008 Between: Chellaboina Phaker and others … Petitioners AND Government of Andhra Pradesh and others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.10158 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare notification, dated 16.04.2007, issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) whereby the respondents sought to acquire the lands of the petitioners indicated therein as illegal and arbitrary. At the hearing, Smt. Bobba Vijayalakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the impugned notification is questioned on two grounds namely, 1) that the land which is proposed for acquisition being an agricultural land cannot be used for construction of residential school complex, which is a non-agricultural purpose, without converting the nature of the land use under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2006, and 2) that the respondents dispensed with enquiry under Section 5A of the Act, though no real urgency is involved. The learned counsel for the petitioners fairly stated that the 1st point raised by her is no longer res integra in view of judgment, dated 28.12.2007 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.18881 of 2006 and batch, wherein a similar contention has been rejected. She, however, persisted with the second contention. I am inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners that the purpose of acquisition, namely, establishment of residential school complex is not so emergent in nature as to warrant dispensing with enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. The Supreme Court in a catena of judgments held that Section 5A of the Act provides for a valuable opportunity to the owners of the land, who seek to object acquisition and invoking the urgency clause in a routine manner in cases where real urgency is not involved constitutes arbitrary exercise of power (see Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited v. Darius Shapur Chenai and others [1] ). In view of the above, the writ petition is partly allowed. Declaration, dated 06.03.2007, issued under Section 6 of the Act is set aside. Respondents 2 and 3 are directed to hold enquiry under Section 5A of the Act by giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners. Till then, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land in dispute. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 21st JANUARY, 2008. kvni [1] 2005(7) SCC 627