IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.8699 of 2008 Between: 1 Ranganadham Veeraswamy Alias Tatarao, S/o. Late Nukaraju, R/o. Fakruddinpalem, Pithapuram Mandal, East Godavari District. 2 Mogilinidi Venkateswara Rao S/o.Veera Bhadra Rao R/o.Komaragiri, U.Kothapalli Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 3 Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari 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 may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in seeking to acquire his land of an extent of Ac. 2.80 cents in S.No. 195 situate at Kandarada Village, Pithapuram Mandalam, East Godavari District pursuant to the notification issued by the 2nd respondent U/s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act in Ref.No.G2/1259/2008, dt. 14-03-2008 and the action of the respondents in seeking to dispossess them from lands without following the due process of law as illegal, arbitrary etc., and grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.V.L.N.SARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.8699 of 2008 ORDER: Petitioner seeks to assail the notification issued by the 2nd respondent-District Collector, Kakinada, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) and published on 14.03.2008 proposing to acquire the land to an extent of Ac.4.97 cents in different survey numbers situated at Kandarada village of Pithapuram Mandal in East Godavari District. It is the case of the petitioner that though he is a bona fide purchaser of the land in Sy.No.195 admeasuring Acs.2.80 cents situated at Kandara village, his name was not shown in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, and therefore, he could not file any objections to the acquisition before the 3rd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, who was authorized to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Hence, he filed this writ petition seeking appropriate directions, in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has narrated as to how the petitioner came into possession of the land in question. However, this court, in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot deal with the issue as to whether the petitioner or the person whose name is mentioned in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, is the owner of the land in question. As the petitioner is claiming title over the land in question, I deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to file objections to the proposed acquisition, before the 3rd respondent. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file his objections before the 3rd respondent, and on receipt of such objections, the 3rd respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such enquiry is conducted and appropriate orders are passed under Section 5-A of the Act, petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the land in question. __________ 21.04.2007 sh To 1 The Secretary, its Revenue (Land Acquisition) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 3 Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 4 Two C.Cs 5 Two C.D. copies.