THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.18954 of 2006 Dated 20th July, 2011 Between: Chekkakula Krishnamnaidu (died) as per LRs and others …Petitioners And The District Collector, Viziznagaram District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: --- Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP for Land Acquisition Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri P.Roy Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal. The notification, dated 04.11.2005, issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) and the declaration, dated 14.11.2005, under Section 6 of the Act, whereby it is proposed to acquire the extents of Acs.18.00, Acs.5.96, Acs.11.23, Acs.12.16, Acs.9.26, Acs.14.67, Acs.3.84, Acs.2.40, Acs.2.01 and Acs.10.00 in Survey Nos.190, 191, 192/3, 193, 201, 185, 188/1, 189/1, 183/18 and 197 of Kankatapalli Village, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District, are under challenge in this writ petition. A perusal of the proceeding sheet shows that the writ petition with respect to petitioner Nos.4 to 10 was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court by order, dated 29.04.2010. The petitioners assailed the validity of the acquisition proceedings on various grounds. Ordinarily, these grounds would have been traversed for proper and effective adjudication of the writ petition. However, such a need is obviated for the reason that in the counter affidavit filed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Land Acquisition Officer, Vizianagaram, respondent No.2, it is inter alia averred that following the notification and declaration issued under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act respectively, an award enquiry was held on 23.12.2005 and 26.12.2005, in which, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have participated and submitted their statements and that after completion of the award enquiry, an award was passed on 14.02.2006, and possession of the land was taken and handed over to the Zonal Manager, APIIC Limited, Vizianagaram on 18.02.2006. This Court considering these facts vacated the interim order by order, dated 30.04.2007. The petitioners have failed to move an application for amendment of the prayer in order to question the award. In my considered opinion, unless the petitioners challenge the validity of the award, they are not entitled to any relief in this writ petition inasmuch as initiation of the acquisition proceedings has culminated into passing of the award. So much so the writ petition as conceived has virtually become infructuous and the same is dismissed as such. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.24216 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20th July, 2011 VGB