IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18254 of 2008 Between: 1 Yemineni suryanarayana S/o. Venkata Swamy Krosuruvaripalem village, Nizampatnam Panchayat & Mandal, guntur District. 2 Yemineni Subba Rao S/o. Rama Swamy Krosuruvaripalem village, Nizampatnam Panchayat & Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, ( Land Acquisition Officer), Tenali, Guntur District. 2 The Tahsildar, Nizampatnam Mandal, Guntur district. .....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 to set aside the proceedings of the 1st respondent vide Rc.No.229/2006/A, dated 25-7-2007 as well as proceedings Rc.No. 229/2006/A, dated 16-6-2008 to acquire the lands of the petitioners situated at Nizampatnam Village and Mandal, Guntur District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.RAMA KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 18254 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled challenging the notiﬁcation dated 25-07-2007 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, acquiring the lands belonging to the petitioners situated in Nizampatnam village, Guntur District. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition under instructions stated that pursuant to the impugned notiﬁcation, further proceedings were already taken and an award was also passed on 25-07-2008 ﬁxing the compensation. In the circumstances, interference by this Court at this stage is unwarranted. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioners to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law for enhancement of compensation if they so choose. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 22-08-2008 KLP