IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13409 of 2008 Between: 1.Rao Raj Gopal S/o.Bapanaiah Rao (Major) Kuthukudumilli(V) U.Kothapalli(M) East Godavari District 2.Rao Raj Kamal S/o.Bapanaiah Rao (Major) Kuthukudumilli(V) U.Kothapalli(M) East Godavari District 3.Rao Venkata Surya Prakasa Rao S/o.Rao Venkata Satyanarayana Rao Kuthukudumilli(V) U.Kothapalli(M) East Godavari District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector East Godavari District 2 Land Acquisition Officer revenue Divisional Officer Kakinada E.G 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the Notification in ref.G2/1260/2008 dt.13-03-2008 of the 1st respondent issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as arbitrary illegal, violative of Art 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.SUDERSHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.13409 of 2008 ORDER: The lands belonging to the petitioners situated in Kuthukudumilli, U.Kothapalli Mandal, East Godavari District, were sought to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for providing house sites to the weaker sections under III Phase of Indiramma Programme. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 13.0.32008, whereunder the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District, was authorized to conduct enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. Pursuant thereto, notices were issued for enquiry under Section 5A of the Act and the petitioners submitted their objections. The petitioners state that no enquiry has been conducted into the objections raised by them and no decision as such has been taken by the first respondent till today and no declaration under Section 6 of the Act has been made. However, the respondents are trying to dispossess the petitioners high-handedly. Hence, this writ petition seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents as arbitrary and illegal. Since admittedly, the urgency clause under sub- section (4) of Section 17 of the Act has not been invoked and the enquiry under Section 5A of the Act has been proposed to be conducted, it is not open to the respondents to dispossess the petitioners without taking further steps as contemplated under provisions of the Act. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with any part of the lands belonging to the petitioners pursuant to the notification, dated 13.03.2008, without following due process of law. No costs. _______________ 26.06.2008 Note: Communicate the operative portion of the order by wire at party’s costs. (b/o) VGB