IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT :PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 3016 of 2001 Between: 1. Pyda Lakshmi, W/o. Soma Malleswararao 2. Pyda Kamala Devi, W/o. Bhavan Prasad 3. Pyda Venkata Satyamani, W/o. Sankara Rao 4. Pyda Atchyutamba, W/o. Krishna Mohan. ..... Petitioners AND 1. Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., rep. by Chairman and Managing Director, Parishram Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2. Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 3. Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Visakhapatnam. .....Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in seeking to acquire their land of an extent of Ac. 1.80 cents in S.No.76/1, Peddapuram, East Godavari District through the Notification U/s. 4(1) of L.A.Act issued by the 2nd respondent in Ref. No. G1/76764A/99, dt: 22-1-2000 published in East Godavari District Gazette E.G.No. 8/2000 dt. 22-1-2000 and the consequential Notice U/s. 9(3) and 10 of L.A.Act in Ref. No. SDC/LA/APPIC/26/96, dt. 25-1-2001 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary etc. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed herein and the order of the High Court dated. 23-02-2001 made in WPMP.No. 3829/2001 and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M.V.S.Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners and of G.P. for Land Acquisition for the Respondents 1 & 2 and of Sri R.Subba Rao, Advocate for the Respondent No.3, the Court made the following ORDER: “ Despite the specific purpose for adjourning the case, viz., to produce the relevant record, today, at the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition expressed his helplessness in producing the record by stating that the record pertaining to the correspondence between the Government and the District Collector on the subject relating to land acquisition is not brought by the Revenue Inspector, through whom files have been sent. ..2.. This Court is unable to appreciate the lackluster manner in which respondents 2 and 3 have responded to the Court’s process. Respondents 2 and 3 are, therefore, directed to be present along with the record on the next date of hearing. Post on 30-10-2008.” ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Parishram Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2. The Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada, E.G.District. 3. The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., Visakhapatnam. (2 & 3 by Speed Post/RPAD with a direction to be present before this Court on 30-10-2008 at 10.30 A.M. along with the record) 4. Two CCs to G.P. for Land Acquisition, High Court of A.P.Hyd(OUT) 5. One CC to Sri M.V.S.Suresh Kumar, Advocate (OPUC) 6. One spare copy. SAH HIGH COURT CVNRJ DATED: 21-10-2008 NOTE: POST ON 30-10-2008 ORDER WP.NO. 3016 OF 2001 DIRECTION DRAFTED BY: SAH APPROVED BY: DRAFTED ON: 22-10-2008 HIGH COURT CVNRJ DATED: 21-10-2008 NOTE: POST ON 30-10-2008 ORDER WP.NO. 3016 OF 2001 DIRECTION