THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No.27894 of 1996 Date: 22-06-2007 Between: M.Poshaiah Petitioner And The District Collector (Cooperation), Warangal, Warangal District and others Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No. 27894 of 1996 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been instituted seeking the following relief: “ to issue a writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the compensation to the petitioner for the lands acquired in Survey No.356/1, situated in Jhally Village, Chennaraopet Mandal, Warangal District, acquired for the purpose of constructing 33/11 K.V.Sub-Station, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioner as per the market value of the lands, for the lands acquired in Survey No.356/1, to the extent of Ac.2.00 situated in Jhally Village of Chennaraopet Mandal, Warangal District for the purpose of constructing 33/11 K.V. Sub-station and pass such other orders” 2. But however, at my instance, the District Collector, Warangal, reexamined the issue relating to payment of compensation to the writ petitioner for the lands which have been originally assigned to him, which were subsequently transferred to the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board to enable them to construct a sub-station thereon and a detailed order was passed on 14-06-2007. The said order was the result of certain enquiries conducted. The District Collector has specifically recorded that no notice was given to the writ petitioner prior to these orders as he was not in occupation of the lands. It is also asserted that the writ petitioner has sold away the entire land illegally and thus contravened the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act-1977 (Act 9 of 1977) (for short ‘the Act 9 of 1977) and therefore, the District Collector concluded that the writ petitioner is not entitled to be paid any compensation for depriving him of the land. 3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner has taken out W.P.M.P.No.16322 of 2007 seeking amendment of the prayer in the writ petition and he sought to challenge the validity of the orders passed by the District Collector on 14-06-2007. Since this is an old writ petition pending for more than 10 years, I do not consider it appropriate to permit the relief portion of the writ petition to be amended now as it would require further pleadings to be set up . I therefore, consider it appropriate to direct the writ petitioner to file a detailed representation treating the orders passed by the District Collector on 14-06-2007 as provisional in nature. The writ petitioner shall file his detailed representation before the District Collector enclosing the necessary material in support of his claim on or before 15th July,2007. On receipt of such representation, the District Collector may authorize the Tahesildar, Chennaraopet, to conduct a detailed enquiry in the presence of the writ petitioner and provide him an opportunity to produce such relevant evidence to demonstrate that he continued to occupy the land in occupation and that he had not violated any of the provisions of the Act 9 of 1977. Based thereon final orders be passed either declaring the writ petitioner is entitled to compensation or otherwise. I make it clear that I have not taken into account the various contentions canvassed by the writ petitioner contesting the correctness of the orders passed by the District Collector on 14-06-2007, for, it is admitted that no notice was issued to the writ petitioner prior to passing such an order. The enquiry be concluded within a further period of three months thereafter. 4. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of, but however, without costs. _______________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO,J 22-06-2007 Note: C.C. in three days. B/o Stp