THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos : 21187 & 21279 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: The District Collector, East Godavari, 2nd respondent herein, issued a notiﬁcation, dated 15.03.2008, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’), proposing to acquire Ac.4.97 cents of land in Kandarada Village, Pithapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, for the purpose of providing house sites to the poor. The lands of the petitioners were included in the notification. Enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was conducted. The petitioners submitted detailed representations, raising several objections to the acquisition. After calling for the remarks from the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, the 2nd respondent passed an order, dated 12.08.2008, rejecting the objections. The petitioners ﬁled a representation/appeal under Section 15-A of the Act, before the Government, 1st respondent herein. Their grievance is that even while the appeal is pending, respondents 2 and 3 are trying to dispossess them from the land. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Notices were issued under Section 5-A of the Act. The petitioners submitted detailed representations, raising several objections to the proposed acquisition. The 2nd respondent passed an order, dated 12.08.2008, rejecting the objections. Section 15-A of the Act confers power upon the 1st respondent to call for records relating to any ﬁndings arrived at, during the course of acquisition. The only limitation on exercise of such power is that the award must not have been passed. The petitioners have submitted a representation/appeal under Section 15-A of the Act. It is stated by the learned Government Pleader that the 1st respondent has since called for the records from respondents 2 and 3. When the matter is under consideration of the 1st respondent, respondents 2 and 3 cannot dispossess the petitioners. Even otherwise, the question of dispossessing the petitioners would arise, if only the declaration under Section 6 of the Act is published and the award under Section 11 of the Act is passed. Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of, directing that respondents 2 and 3 shall not interfere with the possession of the petitioners, pending consideration of the matter by the 1st respondent under Section 15-A of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 22.10.2008 JSU THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos : 21187 & 21279 of 2007 Date: 22.10.2008 JSU