IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 20941 of 2007 Between: Bedeti Sivaramakrishna Prasad S/o.Venkata Krishnarao R/o.Nellapalli village, Talluru Mandal East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of AP., rep.by its Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 The District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer cum Land Acquisition Officer Kakinada, East Godavari District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 2nd and 3rd respondents in not causing any enquiry despite receipt of the notice dated 11.9.2007 and proceeding with the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act vide a Notification Ref.G2/2978/2007 dated 23.5.2007 for the lands situated in SY.No.44/2B3 of Neelapalli village, Tallareveu Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary, erroneous , highhanded and against Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to acquire the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.1.40 cts in Sy.No.44/2B3 situated at Neelapalli village Tallarevu Mandal, East Godavari District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.K.KISHORE REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents in proceeding to acquire the petitioner’s land of an extent of Ac.1.40 cents situated in S.No.44/2B3 of Neelapalli village, vide Notification dated 23.5.2007 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”), without conducting enquiry under the provisions of the Act, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the respondents not to acquire his land without following due process under law. The petitioner asserts that he purchased an extent of Ac.1.40 cents of land in S.No.44/2B3 situated in Neelapalli village, Tallarevu Mandal, East Godavari District, from one Seshakumari, by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 22.1.2005. Subsequent to the purchase, the authorities, particularly the revenue officials, after holding an enquiry, issued her pattadar passbook on 5.10.2006. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that in spite of the fact that he is the absolute owner of the land in question, the respondents issued the Notification, dated 23.5.2007 under Section 4(1) of the Act indicating that G.Suryanarayana is the absolute owner of an extent of Ac.2.58 cents in S.No.44/2B3. Though the 3rd respondent conducted an enquiry on 2.8.2007 under Section 5(A) of the Act he did not issue any notice to the petitioner calling for his objections. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but at the same time, it shall also be borne in mind that the entire extent, which is under acquisition, is about Ac.04.00 cents of land and the land in question relating to the petitioner is only an extent of Ac.01.40 cents. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 23.5.2007, thereafter an enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act was also proposed to be held, but as nobody participated, the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, who was directed to hold an enquiry into the objections, did not conduct any enquiry. Thereafter, a Notice under Section 9 of the Act was also issued to the interested persons requesting them to participate in the award enquiry. Inasmuch as the petitioner is not served with any notice either with regard to the enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act or with regard to the enquiry under Section 9 of the Act, and the acquisition is with regard to Ac.04.00 cents of land and the petitioner’s land is only an extent of Ac.1.40 cents, which was purchased very recently i.e. on 22.1.2005, this Court is not inclined to set aside the Draft Declaration and other consequential proceedings, but deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to participate in the award enquiry and request the authorities with regard to the payment of compensation. Hence, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the authorities and file his objections with regard to the payment of compensation and the authorities, after affording him an opportunity of being heard, fix the compensation. No costs. ______________ 26.03.2008 bcj