THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION. No.1843 of 2008 Date: 01.02.2008 Between: Mr. S.K. Madeena … Petitioner AND The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Visakhapatnam & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Smt. P. Vijaya Kumari Counsel for the respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for land acquisition THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION. No.1843 of 2008 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare notification dated 06.07.2006 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) and the consequential Gazette Notification, whereby the land covered by Sy.No.7/4 (old Sy.No.225/4), Patta No.788, situated at Narava Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam District is proposed to be acquired for the purpose of expansion of Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone by Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, as illegal. A perusal of the material on record shows that for the purpose of establishment of Special Economic Zone, the land said to be belonging to the petitioner along with other lands were proposed to be acquired by the impugned notification. On the ground that the petitioner’s name did not find a place in the notification, she filed representation dated 19.09.2006 in which it is inter alia stated that she is the lawful owner of the abovementioned property and that she requested respondent No.2 to enquire into the matter and award compensation to her by incorporating her name in the records. After a lapse of about one year four months, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. At the hearing, initially Smt. P. Vijaya Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner pleaded for invalidation of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, but when the Court pointed out to her the contents of the petitioner’s representation dated 19.09.2006 in which she merely pleaded for inclusion of her name and payment of compensation to her, learned counsel made a request to the Court to direct respondent No.2 to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 19.09.2006. I also find from the record an order of this Court passed in Writ Petition Nos.25924 and 21629 of 2006 filed by certain other landowners questioning the same notification. This Court by order dated 04.10.2007 disposed of the said writ petitions directing enquiry under Section 5A of the Act to be held. For the abovementioned reasons, the writ petition is disposed of. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider representation dated 19.09.2006 of the petitioner and pass appropriate order thereon within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.2298 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 01.02.2008 ES