IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20954 of 2008 Between: Kota Krishna Murthy S/o. Late Suryanarayana R/o. Borrampeta Village, Gonipadu Post, L.N. Peta Mandal, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer/Land Acquisition Officer, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. 3 The Tahsildar/Mandal Revenue Officer, L.N. Peta Mandal, L.N. Peta, Srikakulam District. .....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 any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in acquiring the agricultural lands admeasuring Ac 0.54 guntas in Sy.No. 70.5 and Ac 1.78 cents in Sy.No. 702.B of Jambada Village, L.N. Peta Mandal, Srikakulam of the petitioner without mentioning the name of the petitioner and land to be acquired as well as inaction of the respondents in not paying the compensation for the said land to the petitioner and also inaction of the respondents in not disposing of the representation dt. 15-3-2008 as being arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith pay Compensation to the petitioner in respect of the said land. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.VISWANADHAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of about Acs.2.32 cents of land in survey Nos.70.5 and 70.2B of Jambada Village, L.N.Peta Mandal, Srikakulam District. He contends that the possession of the entire land was taken by the respondents for construction of a reservoir. He states that though notiﬁcation under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), was published on 29.07.2005 proposing to acquire Acs.22.56 cents of land in the village for the same purpose, neither his name, nor the land owned by him, were mentioned in it. The petitioner claims to have made a representation, dated 15.03.2008 for payment of compensation. His grievance is that no action has been taken thereon so far. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Even according to the petitioner, his land is not mentioned in the notiﬁcation, dated 29.07.2005, published under Section 4(1) of the Act. If the allegation of the petitioner that the possession of his land is also taken for the same purpose is true, respondents 1 and 2 have to verify the matter and extend necessary relief to the petitioner. The Initial acquisition itself was about four years ago. Though there was some delay on the part of the petitioner in pursuing the remedies, nearly more than six months have elapsed, ever since he submitted his representation. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner, dated 15.03.2008, after due veriﬁcation of the facts, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.20.10.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ