IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 8365 of 2008 Between: Smt.Venna Satyavathi W/o.Sri Koteswara Rao R/o.D.No.41-27-27, Kotha Machine Bazar, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada Division, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the Order Rc.G4.3085/06, dt. 21.3.2008 issued by the first Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Sec. 5A of the Land Acquisition Act and contrary to the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.1900 of 2007 and set aside t he same and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : W.P.NO. 8365 OF 2008 ORDER: An extent of 1 acre of land in Sy.No. 43/1, of Pesaramili village, Gudlavalleru Mandal, Krishna district was proposed for acquisition and in that context a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act”) was published on 5.7.2006. As the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with, the petitioner approached this Court and filed a writ petition vide WP No. 1568 of 2006 and this Court, while disposing of the said writ petition, directed the authorities to hold an enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Pursuant to the said order, an enquiry was held and during the course of the said enquiry, the objections filed by the petitioner were rejected. Again the petitioner approached this Court and filed WP No. 1900 of 2007 and that writ petition was disposed of on 28.12.2007 directing the authorities to give a personal hearing to the petitioner. Thereafter the Revenue Divisional Officer conducted an enquiry and submitted a report. Pursuant to which, the Collector passed an order on 21.3.2008 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Questioning the said order dt. 21.3.2008, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The only contention put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of personal hearing. However, in the impugned order it is clearly mentioned that the petitioner attended the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Therefore, it is necessary to extract the said paragraph, “…as per the instructions of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in the reference 8th cited, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada has issued notices U/s. 5A and served on the individuals to the addresses furnished by them and conducted 5A enquiry on 14.02.2008, and the land owner Smt. Venna Satyavathi w/o Koteswara Rao has filed written objections through advocate and also attended the 5A enquiry filed their objection against the acquisition of their land. The contents of the objection petitions and findings are furnished hereunder.” When the objections were filed through advocate and the petitioner herself attended before the enquiry officer, it cannot be accepted that the petitioner was not given any opportunity of personal hearing. However, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even if it is accepted that the petitioner was given an opportunity of personal hearing, the property was gifted by her father and hence it could not be acquired. For that the Land Acquisition Officer has given a reasoned order stating that the property in question is still in her father’s name and the husband of the petitioner is in the business of sweets and is a wealthy man. For the above reasons, I see no merits in the writ petition and the same is dismissed at the stage of admission. ____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dt. 17.4.2008 KR SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada Division, Krishna District. 3.2 CCs to GP for Land Acquisition, 4. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}