THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.12042 of 2005 10.02. 2011 Between: P.Veera Venkata Satyanarayana ...Petitioner And The District Collector, Kakinada, East Godavari District, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.12042 of 2005 ORDER: The property admeasuring Acs.8.08 cents in survey No.95 among others was owned by M.A.Chowltry, Kakinada, which was taken over by Rajahmundry Municipality. It appears in 1974, the land was leased out to one Venkata Rao who allegedly executed a Will in favour of the petitioner. He, therefore, claims to be cultivating tenant. The first respondent issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity), proposing to acquire the land for the purpose of providing house sites to the persons belonging to weaker sections. The enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with and the publication was made in the local newspapers on 26.02.1999. Alleging that the award was not passed within a period of two years under Section 11-A of the Act and therefore, proceedings have lapsed, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition seeking invalidation of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and all further proceedings. This Court initially granted interim order and subsequently the same was vacated. In the counter affidavit filed by second respondent, it is stated that invoking the provisions of Section 17(4), the enquiry was dispensed with under Section 5- A of the Act and possession was taken duly tendering 80% of the compensation vide proceedings dated 25.03.1999, which was paid to Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry. Possession was taken on 09.04.1999 and pattas could not be distributed in view of the interim orders passed by this Court in a writ petition being W.P.No.8388 of 1999 filed by the petitioner. The said writ petition was dismissed on 24.12.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. It is also stated that Award No.2 of 2002 was passed on 17.04.2002 fixing the market value at Rs.1,50,000/-. The petitioner has not filed any reply affidavit denying the counter averments. This only shows that the counter averment stands unrebutted and award is passed and pattas were already distributed as contended by respondents 4 to 7, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned acquisition proceedings. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 10.02.2011 pln