HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W. P. No. 6408 of 2008 DATED: 07.10.2009 Between: Pothina Somulamma ..... PETITIONER AND The Visakhapatnam Urban Dev. Authority The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corpn. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R:- The main grievance of the petitioner is that 1st respondent, contrary to the master plan and without following the due procedure contemplated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), is trying to lay road in the premises bearing D.No.1-159 admeasuring 600 Sq. Yards of land in Sy. No.27/1 & 2, situated in Pothinamallaiahpalem, which according to her, is arbitrary and illegal. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. On 26.03.2008, this Court, while ordering Notice Before Admission, passed interim order restraining respondents from laying the road in the premises in question. The learned Standing Counsel for Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority submitted that they are not laying the road in the site in question, however, if they propose to lay road in the land in question, they will certainly follow the due procedure or acquire the land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), before laying the road. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the having regard to submission made by the learned Standing Counsel that in case they propose to lay the road in question, they will certainly follow the due procedure or acquire the land in question under the provisions of the Act, before laying the road, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The respondents are directed to not to lay any road in the land belonging to the petitioner, unless and until they follow the due procedure or acquire the land in question under the provisions of the Act.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 7th October, 2009 bcj