IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 10496 of 2001 Between: Vasamsetty Sundaramma W/o. Late V.Swamy R/o. Yenugupalli, P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (Land Acquisition), Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram, East Godavari District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavar District. 4 Sri Seethaswamivari Devsthanam Rep. by its Charperson and Board of Truestees, Yenugupalli, P.Gannavaram Mandal. .....RESPONDENTS 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 respondents in initiating proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring the land of the petitioner in Sy.No.45/2 to an extent of Ac.1.44 1/2cents as highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.456, dt:19-9-95 and also contrary to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and consequently set aside all the proceedings relating to acquisition of the land of the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.V.SHIVAJI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No. 10496 of 2001 Order: Questioning the action of the respondents in seeking to initiate proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring the land of the petitioner for an extent of Ac.1-44 ½ cents as arbitrary and contrary to the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No. 456 dated 19.09.1995, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner’s husband was given lease of an extent of Ac.1-44 ½ cents of land in RS No.45/2 of Rajula Yenugupalli, P. Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. A lease agreement was entered into with the fourth respondent-Temple on 21.08.1971. The lessee died and thereafter his wife claims to have been cultivating the said land. Apprehending that the land would be acquired, the petitioner approached this Court, and this Court in W.P. No. 3438 of 1996 made it clear that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the land in question without recourse to law and without initiating appropriate proceedings to acquire the land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner would contend that, while no notice was issued under the Land Acquisition Act, she was given a xerox copy of the notice in Form-VII, said to have been issued in the name of her husband. She would further state that she was cultivating the land and was paying the required land tax in the name of the fourth respondent. The petitioner would contend that acquisition of her land was contrary to G.O. Ms. No. 456, dated 19.09.1995. In his counter affidavit, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram, East Godavari District, would admit that the petitioner was the wife of the cultivating tenant in Survey No. 45/2, but would deny that the petitioner is the registered tenant of the land. It is further stated that the said land was taken possession on 10.04.2000 by the Mandal Revenue Officer, P. Gannavaram, after observing all the formalities required under law, that the petitioner was directed not to enter into the land under acquisition, that 80% of compensation was already paid to the managing trustee of the temple on 15.09.1996, that the petitioner never approached the respondents seeking information regarding acquisition, that notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act were issued in the name of petitioner’s husband, which was received by one Sri Vasamsetti Satyanarayana, asking him to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer and, after completion of enquiry under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, appropriate orders were passed and this fact was also informed to the petitioner through registered post on 27.04.2000, which was returned with the remarks of the postal department that the addressee had left without instructions and that her whereabouts were not known. The respondents would reiterate that the acquisition was in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.456 and that the said land was required for providing house sites to the poor. The respondents would further state that the petitioner and her deceased husband and son had an extent of Ac.10-77 cents of land, that the petitioner’s contention deserved no consideration and that the petitioner was not a small farmer as they were in possession of Ac.10-77 cents of land in the same village. While this Court initially granted interim suspension on 23.05.2001, the said order was vacated on 18.07.2003. It is evident, therefore, that at least from 2003 the petitioner is no longer in possession of the land. Since there is nothing on record to show as to how the guidelines in G.O. Ms. No. 456, dated 19.09.1995 has been violated, I see no reason to interdict the land acquisition proceedings any further. It is open to the respondents to continue the land acquisition proceedings and to pass an award in accordance with law. Since the respondents contend that notice issued to the petitioner was returned unserved with an endorsement that the whereabouts of the addressee were not known, and as the petitioner is represented by counsel in the present writ proceedings, it is but appropriate that instead of directing fresh notice on the petitioner, it is left open to the petitioner to submit her objections within a period of four weeks from today. The respondents shall, thereafter, consider the objections, if any filed, and pass an award in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. __________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Date: 26.02.2009 Nsr