IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 5107 of 2008 Between: 1 Alluri Venkata Seetha Ramaraju, S/o. Late Pullam Raju, Plot No. 35, Prasanthi Nagar, Peda Waltair, Visakhapatnam - 2 2 Guttimukkala Satyanarayana Raju, S/o. Late Ramakrishna Raju, H.No. 9-166, Kommadi Village, Pothina Mallayyapalem Post, Visakhapatnam. 3 Akkinna Sree Ramamurthy, S/o. Akkinna Dalanna, C/o. Sai Super Speciality Hospital, L.V.T. Road, Vijayanagaram. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, rep by its Vice Chairman, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, rep by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam. .....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 a writ of mandmaus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action of the respondents in purporting to consume the land and building of the petitioners situated in Sy.No. 2(P) of Madhuravada Village and Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District for the realignment of the road connecting to NH 5 to Kommadi Village, without acquiring the properties of the petitioners and without putting the petitioners on notice about the acquisition to the property of the petitioners is arbitrary and illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to forbear from consuming any part of the land/house of the petitioners situated in Sy.No. 2(P) of Madhuravada Village and Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, without following the procedure of law and without paying the compensation to the petitioners, and grant Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.N.RANGA REDDY (SC FOR MPL. CORP. VSP) The Court made the following : ORDER: In [aphc1]this case, the grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent-Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation has been seeking to acquire [aphc2]land for the purpose of laying or widening the road existing, without invoking the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and that the respondent-Corporation has been offering meager amounts as compensation for the land sought to be taken possession of by them. It is further asserted that the value offered by the Corporation is, in fact, less than the value prevailing for the land as also the value fixed by the revenue establishment of the State Government and, hence, the petitioners are not interested in agreeing to receive the compensation offered by the respondent-Corporation and deliver possession of the land. It is needless to observe that the Municipal Corporation cannot take possession of the property owned by the citizens without recourse to law. The respondents are, therefore, directed to follow the procedure laid down in the Land Acquisition Act and acquire the land in question and without adopting such a procedure it should not insist upon the petitioners to part with the possession of the land. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of, but however, without costs. ______________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J. Dt.11-03-2008. KO To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD} [aphc1] [aphc2]