THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.25941 of 2006 Dated 22nd June, 2011 Between: Dr.Kuchipudi Bapinidu …Petitioner And The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri C.V.R.Durga Prasad Counsel for respondents: GP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside notification, dated 22.11.2006, issued by respondent No.1 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). At the hearing, Sri C.V.R.Rudra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, fairly conceded that the issue raised in this writ petition, namely, that without converting the agricultural land for non-agricultural use, the land cannot be notified for acquisition, is no longer res integra in view of the judgment in R.Veera Raghava Prasad and others v. District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam and another[1]. As the only ground, which was raised in this writ petition, is no longer available to the petitioner, the relief as claimed in this writ petition cannot be granted. However, since the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act is yet to be completed, the petitioner is permitted to file objections within a period of four weeks from today before respondent No.2. If such objections are filed before respondent No.2, he shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner before completing the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and passing an order thereon. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, interim order, dated 13.12.2006, shall stand vacated and W.P.M.P.No.33297 of 2006 and W.V.M.P.No.420 of 2007 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 22nd June, 2011 VGB [1] 2008(2) ALT 136