IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 6357 of 2008 Between: 1 Chinna Rajannagari Kista Goud S/o.Pulla Goud R/o. Mustafanagar Village, Gambiraopet Mandal, Karimnagar District. 2 Gopagari Laxmi Narayana S/o.Chandra Goud R/o. Mustafanagar Village, Gambiraopet Mandal, Karimnagar District. 3 Bangla Thirupathi Goud S/o.Malla Goud R/o. Mustafanagar Village, Gambiraopet Mandal, Karimnagar District. 4 Bangla Sudharshan Goud S/o.Malla Goud R/o. Mustafanagar Village, Gambiraopet Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector (L.A.) Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sircilla, Karimnagar 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 1st respondent's impugned notification issued Under Section 4(1) in Proceedings No.G4/64/2007, dated 11-01-2007, published in Karimnagar District Gazette No.2, dated 11-01-2007 and declaration under Section 6 of L.A.Act bearing proceedings No.64/2007 dated 11-01-2006, published in District Gazette bearing No.6, Dated 31-01-2007 to acquire petitioners lands an extent of 0.37 guntas in Sy.No.57, 0.07 guntas in Sy.No. 55/A + 0.17 guntas in Sy.No.56, (totally 0.24 guntas) 0.2 1/4 guntas in Sy.No.55/B and 0.09 1/2 guntas in Sy.No. 55/BC, situated at Mustafanagar Village of Gambhiraopet Mandal, District Karimnagar, respectively, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same to an extent of the petitioners and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.V.RAMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : W.P.NO. 6357 OF 2008 ORDER: The petitioners approached this Court and filed this writ petition with the following prayer, “…This Hon’ble Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the 1st respondent's impugned notification issued Under Section 4(1) in Proceedings No.G4/64/2007, dated 11-01-2007, published in Karimnagar District Gazette No.2, dated 11-01- 2007 and declaration under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 bearing proceedings No.64/2007 dated 11-01-2006, published in District Gazette bearing No.6, Dated 31-01-2007 to acquire petitioners’ lands in an extent of 0.37 guntas in Sy.No.57, 0.07 guntas in Sy.No. 55/A + 0.17 guntas in Sy.No.56, (totally 0.24 guntas) 0.2 1/4 guntas in Sy.No.55/B and 0.09 1/2 guntas in Sy.No. 55/BC, situated at Mustafanagar Village of Gambhiraopet Mandal, District Karimnagar, respectively, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same to an extent of the petitioners and pass such other order or orders”. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. From a perusal of the notification dt. 11.1.2007 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and the draft declaration dt. 11.1.2006 issued under Section 6 of the Act, it is unfortunate that the authorities are not evincing any interest in getting the notifications published in the manner they are expected to be published as per the provisions of the Act. It is only after the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was issued, a draft declaration as provided under Section 6 of the Act shall have to be published. As stated supra, it is clear that the draft declaration was issued on 11.1.2006 much earlier to the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act, which is dated 11.1.2007. For this reason alone, this writ petition has to be allowed. Even if it is accepted that it is only a mistake and the draft declaration is dated 11.1.2007, even then the draft declaration shall have to be set aside for the simple reason that the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act and the draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act shall not be made simultaneously. The law on this aspect is very clear and the Apex Court has clearly laid down the guidelines with regard to the provisions under the Land Acquisition Act. Another mistake that has been committed is the dispensation of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. It is only where there is urgency, the provisions under Section 17 (4) of the Act can be invoked, but not in ordinary cases. The Supreme Court in a judgment reported in Union of India Vs. Krishan Lal Arneja [1] has clearly laid down that dispensation of enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act, as a matter of routine, cannot be done. For the above reasons, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act, whether it is dated 11.1.2006 or 11.1.2007, is hereby set aside and the 1st respondent is hereby directed to hold an enquiry as provided under Section 5-A of the Act by issuing notice to the parties concerned. Accordingly this writ petition is partly allowed. No costs. ____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dt.26.3.2008 KR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector (L.A.) Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sircilla, Karimnagar District. 3. 2 CCs to GP for Land Acquisition, 4. 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR} [1] AIR 2004 SC 3582