IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13880 of 2008 Between: 1 Muppalla Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Subba Rao, R/o. Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 2 R. Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Radhakrishna Murthy, R/o. Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 3 Veemuri Madhusudhana Rao, S/o. Seetaramaiah, R/o. Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. 4 K. Nagendra Rao, S/o. Gnaneswara Rao, R/o. Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Union of India, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport & Highways, Transport Bhavan, Parliament Street, New Delhi - 110 001. 2 National Highways Authority of India, G-5 & 6, Sector - 10, Dwaraka, New Delhi - 110 075, Rep by its Chairman/Managing Director 3 The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit (BOT), Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad. 4 Sri S. Md. Iqbal, Manager (Technical) Office of the Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit (BOT), Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad. 5 The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam 6 The Sub-Collector, Vijayawada Division, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 7 Sri Devineni Raja Sekhar, Member of Legislative Assembly, Vijayawada Constituency, R/o. Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna 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 declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6 in taking steps for changing the alignment of the Kankipadu Bypass which is part of the National Highway No. 9, thereby affecting the petitioner's properties Sy.Nos. 74/1D, 73/1A, 85/6, 129/1B in Kankipadu Village & Mandal, Krishna District, and taking steps to dispossess the petitioners, as illegal, malafide, based on extraneous considerations, violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the constitution of India as also the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6 to refrain doing so and to form the Kankipadu Bypass as per the original alignment, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.P.ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: MR. S.S.VARMA, ADDL. STANDING COUNSEL FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6: G.P. FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondent No.7: MR. T. RAVI KUMAR The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.13880 OF 2008 ORDER: The writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3, 5 and 6 in taking steps for changing the alignment of the Kankipadu Bypass, which is part of the National Highway No.9, thereby affecting the petitioners’ properties situated in Sy.Nos.74/1D, 73/1A, 85/6, 129/1B in Kankipadu Village and Mandal, Krishna District, and taking steps to dispossess the petitioners, as illegal and mala fide, and for consequential directions. Heard the learned Counsel for both sides. The only grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents are intending to realign the original plan of laying road. It appears that as on today no acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act have been issued for acquisition of lands of the petitioners. This Court, on 1.7.2008 granted interim direction not to interfere with the possession of the land of the petitioners without following due process of law. Now, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents states that since no acquisition proceedings have been initiated under the National Highways Act, the petitioners’ grievance is only an apprehension and not true. Under those circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents not to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners’ lands without due process of law and, in case, any acquisition proceedings are initiated by the respondents authorities, the petitioners are at liberty to file all the objections thereto and such objections, including the change of purported change of alignment, shall be considered by the respondents. No order as to costs. ______________ (C.V. Ramulu, J) 20.3.2009 bnr