IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.17424 of 2007 Between: 1 Syed Mujahid, S/o.S.A Ghani, R/o.11-5-414/1, Red Hills, Hyderabad. 2 S.A. Ghani, S/o. S.A Gafoor, R/o.11-5-414/1, Red Hills, Hyderabad. 3 Syed Warisuddin Naveed, S/o. T.S.Athaullah, R/o.4-1-1236/3, Abids Hyderabad. 4 Nasar Khan, S/o. Late Wajeer Khan, R/o. Durga Khazliz Khan, Kismatpur, Ranga Reddy Dist. 5 Nabeel Hussain, S/o. Liftekhar, R/o.6-2-338/1, Hill Colony, Khairatabad,Hyderabad. 6 Rizwan Hyder, S/o. Sajjad Ali, R/o. 8-2-684/3/10, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Collector, Ranga Reddy Dist, Khairatabad,Hyderabad. 2 The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit No.VII, ORR Project HUDA, Tarnaka,Hyderabad. .....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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned notification No.G-2/3128/2004 dt.19-06-2004 issued under Sec.4(1) of the L.A. Act and consequently the Sec.6 declaration notification No.G1/3128/2004 dt.23-07-2005 as null void, lapsed ab-initio and also direct the respondents herein not to take the physical possession of the properties in pursuance of the impugned notices and to pass any award in pursuance of the impugned notices in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.C.B.RAM MOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: Learned counsel on either side fairly conceded that the issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Gajjela Narasimha Reddy and others v. Collector, Ranga Reddy District and another[1]. Therefore, this writ petition is also liable to be allowed in terms of the said judgment. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notifications are quashed to the extent of the lands belonging to the petitioners. The respondents, however, are not precluded from initiating acquisition proceedings afresh in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 04.03.2009 va [1] 2008 (5) ALD 302