IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 14048 of 2008 Between: 1.Pilli Mutyala Rao S/o.Late Kama Raju R/o.Venkatapuram Kakinada Rural (M)E.G District 2.Penkay Satyanarayana S/o.Late Soma Raju R/o.Venkatapuram Kakinada Rural (M)E.G District 3.Pilli Subba Rao S/o.Late Kama Raju R/o.Venkatapuram Kakinada Rural (M)E.G District 4.Gubbala Bhaskara Rao S/o.Late Nagar Raju R/o.Venkatapuram Kakinada Rural (M)E.G District 5.Pilla Ramayamma S/o.Late Subbi Raju R/o.Venkatapuram Kakinada Rural (M)E.G District 6.Rani Sita Ramalakshmi W/o.Deekshithulu D.No.67-2-21 Ashok Nagar Shirdi Sai Temple Street Kakinada E.G District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1.The Government of A.P rep.by its Secretary Revenue Department(Land Acquisition) Secretariat Hyderabad 2.The District Collector E.G District at Kakinada 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Kakinada E.G District 4.The Tahasildar Kakinada Rural(M) 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the 2nd respondent in issuing impugned notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition act vide proceedings Ref.No.G2/1263/2008 dt.6-4- 2008 published in the local daily on 16-4-2008 in so far as lands of the petitioners situated Sy.No.158/6 158/7 158/8 158/9 and 160 situated in the Panduru(V) of Kakinada Rual(M) E.G District and quash the same is highly illegal arbitrary and violative of Art.14 and 21 of the constitution of India and contrary to the guidelines issued by the Government in circular Memo No.10054/L.A I/2005 dt.22-4-2006 and also contrary to the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Yadaiah Vs Government of A.P reported in 1983(1) ALT 233. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.EATHAKOTA VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.14048 of 2008 ORDER: The lands belonging to the petitioners situated in Survey Nos.158/6, 158/7, 158/8, 158/9 and 160 of Panduru village, Kakinada Rural Mandal, East Godavari District, were sought to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for the purpose of providing house sites under Phase-III of Indiramma Programme. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 06.04.2008, under which, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, was authorized to conduct enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. The petitioner states that in response to the notice issued, the petitioners have submitted their objections to the proposed acquisition. The only grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that without considering their objections and even without making a declaration under Section 6 of the Act, the respondents are proposing to dispossess them from the lands in question forcibly. Hence, this writ petition. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents, and having regard to the fact that declaration under Section 6 of the Act has not yet been made, it is not open to the respondents to interfere with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the lands in question without following due process of law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners in respect of the lands in question in any manner whatsoever without considering the objections raised by them to the proposed acquisition and without taking necessary steps following due process of law. No costs. _______________ 02.07.2008 VGB