IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 8152 of 2008 Between: Magatapalli Rajesh S/o.Suryanarayana Murthy R/o.Dosakayalapalli, Korukonda Mandal, East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District kakinada 2 The Revenue Divisional officer cum Land Acquisition Officer, Peddapuram, East Godavari District 3 The Mandal Revenue officer, Rangampeta 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 writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing Notification Ref.No.G2/1445/2008 dated 17.3.2008 proposing to acquire the land an extent of Ac.0.84 cents in Sy.No.206/6A to E of Chendredu village, Rangampeta Mandal, East Godavari District of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of the land acquisition Act and set aside the same consequently directing the respondents to drop further proceedings including dispossession of the petitioners from the said land. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.V.S.PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in issuing Notification dated 17.3.2008 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) proposing to acquire the petitioner’s land of an extent of Ac.0.84 cents in S.No.206/6A to E situated in Chendredu village, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner asserts that he purchased an extent of Ac.0.84 cents of land in S.No.206/6A to E situated in Chendredu village, Rangampeta Mandal, East Godavari District under a registered sale deed dated 13.9.2004. The revenue authorities issued pattadar passbook and title deed in his favour on 12.10.2004 and since then he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of it. While so, the respondents issued a Notification dated 17.3.2008 under Section 4(1) of the Act proposing to acquire the land in question by mentioning the names of his vendors. In fact, the petitioner is the owner of the land in question and he was not aware of the land acquisition proceedings, and therefore he could not participate in the enquiry conducted under Section 5(A) of the Act. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that the respondents, without issuing any notice nor affording any opportunity to him to put forth his version, are proceeding with the enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Once the petitioner purchased the land in question vide registered sale deed dated 13.9.2004, and the same is mutated in village records and pattadar passbook was also given in his favour, the respondents ought to have looked into the revenue records and issued notice to the petitioner with regard to the date of the enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act. Now that the petitioner is aware of the land acquisition proceedings, he is hereby directed to file his objections, if any, within a period of two weeks, and thereafter, the 2nd respondent-R.D.O. may, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, decide the petitioner’s case and submit a report to the 1st respondent-District Collector so that the Collector can take a decision in the matter. In terms of the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________ 16.04.2008 bcj