IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.3708, 8310, 8433 and 20900 of 2007 W.P.No.3708 of 2007: Between: R. Munikrishnama Naidu ..... Petitioner AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, (Land Acquisition Officer), Tirupati, Chittoor District & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.V. Bhuvaneshwari Counsel for respondents 1,2&5: GP for Land Acquisition Counsel for respondents 3&4: Sri P. Roy Reddy The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.3708, 8310, 8433 and 20900 of 2007 COMMON ORDER: These Writ Petitions are filed assailing notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”. At the hearing, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition and not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that these Writ Petitions are identical to Writ Petition No.1728 of 2008, which was disposed of by this Court on 26.04.2011. While declining to quash the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, this Court has given liberty to the petitioner therein to question the purported consent award, if he feels aggrieved thereby. Following the same reasons, as were assigned for disposal of the said Writ Petition, these Writ Petitions are also disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to question the consent award at their option. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petitions, all the interlocutory applications pending in these Writ Petitions are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 28.04.2011 ES