IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 5318 of 2008 Between: Dutta Yedukonda Venkata Satyanaraya S/o.Kesavulu R/o.Jaggannapeta,Tadepalligudem(M) W.G Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State Of A.P, Rep.by its Secretary Revenue(L.A) Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Dist Collector West Godavari Dist Eluru 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Eluru,W.G Dist .....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 any writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the acquisition proceedings of an extent of Ac.0-86 cents in S.No.189/9 of Jaggannapeta(V) Tadepalligudem(M) W.G Dist as illegal,arbitrary violative provisions of Land Acquisition Act,1894 and Art 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Notification issued under Sec4(1) of the Act and other proceedings to acquire the land of an extent of Ac.0.86 cents in S.No.189/9 of Jaggannapeta(V) Tadepalligudem(M) W.G Dist and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.S.SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: Petitioner approached this Court and filed the present Writ Petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the acquisition proceedings of an extent of Ac.0.86 cents in Sy.No.189/9 of Jaggannapeta village, Tadepalligudem mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( for brevity, ‘the Act’) and Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents. 3. The brief facts are that the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 28-04-2007 and thereafter a notice regarding the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was issued on 05-03-2007 and though the petitioner filed his objections stating that the land in question shall not be acquired for the purpose of construction of houses to the weaker sections under ‘Indiramma Scheme’, an enquiry was conducted and his objections were rejected. According to the petitioner no order was served on him with regard to the rejection of the said objections. Thereafter, a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 18-05-2005 and without issuing any notice as provided for under Section 9(3) of the Act an award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 18-11-2007 and a notice in form No.9 under Section 12(2) of the Act was served on him on 05-03-2008. According to the petitioner every thing was done behind his back and it is only when the notice in Form-9 was served he came to know about the said rejection of his objections and about the award enquiry and hence, he approached this Court and filed the present Writ Petition. 4. When this matter came up for admission the learned Government Pleader took time stating that she will produce the record. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing the learned Government Pleader is ready with the record and as per the said record the objections were rejected by the Collector on 19-04-2007 and the same was communicated to the petitioner on 21-04-2007 and it was endorsed. Thereafter, it was sent to the office of the Collector on 28-04-2007 and on the basis of the same, the said declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published. From the record it is clear that the notice in Form-7 as provided for under Section 9(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 28-05-2007 and it is only after the issuance of the said notice award enquiry was conducted and award was passed on 18-11- 2007. 5. From the above it is clear that it is not as though the petitioner came to know all these things only on 05-03-2008 when the notice under Form-9 was served on him and that the petitioner had not approached this Court at the appropriate time and hence, no relief can be granted. 6. Accordingly Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ T.GOPALAKRISHNA,J 18th March, 2008 Tsy To 1 The Secretary, State Of A.P, Revenue(L.A) Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Dist Collector, West Godavari Dist Eluru 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer Eluru, W.G Dist