IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 3946 of 2008 Between: 1 Lalam Mahalakshmi W/o. Late Satyanarayana R/o. Rongalivanipalem Village, H/o. Kunchangi, Anakapalle Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 2 Lalam Varalaxmi D/o. Late Satyanarayana R/o. Rongalivanipalem Village, H/o. Kunchangi, Anakapalle Mandal, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Special Deputy Collector, Unit-I Land Acquisition, SEZ, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3 Lalam Trimurthulu S/o. Late Kannalu R/o. Krishnapalem Rambilli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 Lalam Bangaiah S/o. Late Kannalu R/o. Krishnapalem Rambilli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 5 Kasireedy Venku Naidu S/o. Kannaiah S/o. Late Kannalu, aged 50 years, R/o. Krishnapalem Rambilli Mandal, Visakhapatnam 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 for not passing any orders on the representation dt.27.10.2007 submitted by the petitioner requesting the authorities to issue notice to her enabling her to participate in the enquiry to be conducted relating to the Award with respect to the acquisition of lands of the petitioner's ancestral property in various survey numbers and extents situated at Krishnapalem Village, Rambilli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent No.1 and 2 herein to refer the matter to the competent Civil Court for adjudication. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CHILAMKURI HANUMANTHA RAYUDU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in not passing any orders on the petitioners’ representation dated 27.10.2007, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to refer the matter to a competent civil Court for adjudication. The 1st petitioner is the wife and the 2nd petitioner is the daughter of late Satyanarayana. The 1st petitioner’s father-in-law possessed various extents of land situated in Krishnapalem village, Ramkbilli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, which are ancestral properties and were partitioned between her husband and his brothers i.e. respondents 3 and 4. Subsequent to the death of her husband the lands were mutated in her name and the revenue authorities issued pattadar passbook and title deeds in her favour. While so, respondents 1 and 2 issued Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) wherein the 1st petitioner’s name is not shown as owner of the lands in question. Coming to know of this, the petitioners made a representation dated 27.10.2007 before the 2nd respondent-Special Deputy Collector with a request to allow them to participate in the Award enquiry so as to enable them to represent the matter and get their amount of share. Now, the petitioners’ grievance is that the 2nd respondent, without affording an opportunity to them to participate in the Award enquiry, nor passing any orders on their representation, are trying to pay compensation to respondent Nos. 3 to 5. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Even in the affidavit it is clearly stated that the 2nd respondent is making hectic efforts to pass an Award in favour of respondents 3 to 5 and pay compensation to them. Inasmuch as six months have lapsed from the date of the representation, it is not known whether any Award is passed or not. Hence, this Court is of the view that in case, if no award has been passed nor any compensation has been paid to respondent Nos.3 to 5, the authority i.e. the 2nd respondent-Special Deputy Collector may consider the petitioners’ representation dated 27.10.2007 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________ 21.04.2008 Note: Furnish copy by tomorrow B/o bcj