IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4738 of 2009 Between: Dro.Kakarla Subba Rao S/o.Late Sri K.Venkataratnam R/o.21/B Road No.2,Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep.by its Chief City Planner,Hyderabad 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep.by its Engineering Chief,Hyderabad 3 Government of Andhra PRadesh, rep.by its Ex-Officio Principal Secretary, Secretariat,Hyderabad .....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 direction or direction or order especially in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Short Tender Notice No.118/ENC/GHMC/TA0II/K5/2008 dated 1.12.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent inter alia for the purposes for construction of 120 ft road passing through the property of the petitioner as being arbitrary,and illegal, and vioaltive of the rights of the petitioner under Articles, 14,19 and 300A of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondents: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 4738 of 2009 Oral order: The petitioner has questioned the Tender Notice dated 01.12.2008, issued by respondent No.2-GHMC inter alia seeking to lay 120’ road through the property of the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner states that he is the owner of agricultural land in an extent of Acs. 18.05 guntas in Sy. Nos. 73, 74 and 75, Shaikpet village, Hyderabad, and that he has leased out the said land for running an International Educational Academy, and while so it is the case of the petitioner that the respondents without issuing any notice and without following the due process of land and without acquiring the land as required under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are trying to lay a 120’ road through the land of the petitioner. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2-GHMC and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for respondent No.3 submitted that the respondents would lay road through the land of the petitioner only after acquiring the same under the provisions of the Land Acquisition, 1894 and after paying compensation. The above submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2-GHMC and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for respondent No.3, is placed on record, and the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The respondents shall not lay road through the land of the petitioner unless they acquire the same under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and pay him compensation. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 6th March, 2009 KSR