IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P. Nos. 3840 of 2004 and 10439 of 2004 WRIT PETITION NO : 3840 of 2004 Between: Merla Seshayya Choultry, Narsapurapupeta Village Ramachandrapuram Mandal, East Godavari District rep., by its Hereditary Trustee, Mr.Merla Ramayya Choudary, s/o Veeranna @ Ambikeswara Rao, r/o Velangi Village, Karapa Mandal, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner of Endowments, Tilak Road, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Kakinada. 3 District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 4 Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada. 5 Mandal Revenue Officer, Kajuluru Mandal, E.G.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 any appropriate writ, order or direction, preferably a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in acquiring wet land of the petitioner sathram admeasuring Ac.11.23 cents situated at Sy.Nos.28/14, 29/1, 29/2, 29/3, 29/4A, 30/6, 30/7 and 39/2 of Manjeru Village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District, as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner Sathram from the said land. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION WRIT PETITION No: 10439 of 2004 Between: 1 Mulakala Subba Rao, S/o Venkata Rao, R/o 2-440, Isukapodi, Selapaka, Kajuluru Mandalam, East Godavari District. 2 Pasala Balaram, S/o P. Sathi Raju, R/o 2-439, Isukapodi, Selapaka, Kajuluru Mandalam, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Station House Officer, P.S. Gollepalem, East Godavari District. 2 The Executive Officer, Merla Seshayya Choultry, Narasapurapupeta Village, Ramachandrapuram Village, East Godavari District. 3 The Hereditary Trustee, Merla Seshayya Choultry, Narasapurapupeta Village, Ramachandrapuram Village, East Godavari District. 4 The Village Secretary, Manjeru Village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 1st respondent and his subordinates in interfering with the possession and enjoyment and cultivation of the lands held by the petitioners in Sy.Nos. 28/5, 28/7, 28/14, 29/1, 29/3, 30/6, to an extent of Ac. 6.15 and the lands in respect of Ac. 6.18 cents in Sy.No. 29/4A, 30/7, 38/15, 29/2, 39/2, situated at Manjeru Village of Kajuluru Mandal, at the instance of the 4th respondent as arbitrary, illegal and void ab initio besides violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India and principles of natural justice and further may be pleased to direct the 1st respondent and his subordinates not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.J.ASHVINI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.N.INDRANI The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. Nos. 3840 and 10439 of 2004 COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is similar and identical, both the writ petitions are disposed of by this common order. W.P. No. 3840 of 2004: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in acquiring the wetlands of the petitioner- Choultry admeasuring Ac.11.23 cents, situated at S.Nos.28/14, 29/1, 29/2, 29/3, 29/4A, 30/6, 30/7 and 39/2 of Manjeru village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice; consequently, to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner-Choultry from the said land. The writ petition is filed by one Merla Ramayya Choudary s/o Veeranna, who is said to be the hereditary trustee of Merla Seshayya Choultry, Narsapurapupeta village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. According to him, his great grandfather Sri Merla Seshayya endowed an extent of Ac.14.50 cents of land situated in S.Nos. 28/14, 29/1, 29/2, 29/3, 29/4A, 30/6, 30/7, 38/15 and 39/2 of Manjeru village, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District in the year 1925, for the purpose of maintaining Choultry. At present, he is managing the affairs of the petitioner-Choultry. According to him, already once the land belonging to the petitioner-Choultry was acquired and now the present notification is issued for acquiring Ac.11-23 cents belonging to the petitioner-Choultry. According to the petitioner, no permission from respondents 1 and 2 was obtained by respondents 3 to 5, but land acquisition proceedings have been initiated proposing to acquire the lands of the petitioner-Choultry for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the Society. The case of the petitioner is that though certain Government lands are available in the village which are more suited for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections, instead of acquiring the said lands the respondents 3 to 5 are bent upon acquiring the lands of the petitioner-Choultry, thereby defeating the very purpose for which the lands in question were endowed by his great grandfather Sri Merla Seshayya. There is no necessity of going into all the details. On behalf of 1st respondent a detailed counter affidavit is filed and it is stated that no permission was granted by the Endowments Department for the purpose of acquisition of subject Choultry lands for providing house sites to weaker sections etc. Under those circumstances, at the time of admission of writ petition, status quo as to possession as on that date was directed to be maintained. It is stated that the petitioner-Choultry was in possession as on the date of passing of the interim order. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition submitted that all further proceedings pursuant to issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act have taken place ; however, physical possession was not disturbed in view of the interim orders passed by this Court. Be that as it may, since no permission was granted by the Commissioner of Endowments, the land belonging to the petitioner- Choultry should not have been acquired by respondents 3 to 5 in an arbitrary manner. Therefore, on this ground alone, the acquisition proceedings initiated on 30.1.2004 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and all further proceedings thereon are liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside. The writ petition is allowed accordingly. W.P. No. 10439 of 2004: In this writ petition, the petitioners are cultivating tenants of the Choultry lands, which are sought to be acquired. However, the fact remains that the subject lands are choultry lands and no permission was given for acquisition of those lands, Therefore, in view of the order passed in W.P. No. 3840 of 2004 and the reasons mentioned therein, this writ petition also is liable to be allowed and accordingly allowed. In the result, both the writ petitions are allowed. No order as to costs. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 29-6-2009. MVB.