HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 3115 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner challenges notification, dated 15-04-2006, issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) by the 5th respondent. Through the said notification, an extent of Acs.53-18 gts., of land is proposed to be acquired for Integrated Townships. The petitioner states that it has purchased the property on 17-08-2006 and it is not aware of the proceedings initiated through the said notification. The petitioner contends that the purpose mentioned in the notification is vague and such notifications were set aside by this Court in Gajjela Narasimha Reddy & others v. The Collector, Ranga Reddy District & another[1]. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 4 and 5. 3. The purpose mentioned in the notification is “for Integrated Townships”. This Court has an occasion to deal with the notifications of similar nature. In Gajjela Narasimha Reddy’s case (supra), it was held that such notification does not fulfil the essential ingredients contemplated under Section 4 (1) of the Act and the purpose mentioned therein cannot be treated as public purpose. As a matter of fact, many identical notifications issued on the same day in respect of the lands, were set aside by this Court, following the said judgment. It is brought to the notice of this Court that though the award was passed, possession of the land was not taken. 5. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned notification is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J February 15, 2011. KTL [1] 2008 (5) ALT 133