IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 15029 of 2008 Between: 1.G. Srinivasa Reddy S/o. Atchi Reddy R/o. Ravulapalem, East Godavari. 2.G. Satyanarayana Reddy S/o. Atchi Reddy R/o. Ravulapalem, East Godavari. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-RDO, Amalapuram, 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 will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the notification in G3/1268/2008, dated 14.03.2008, under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, published in District Gazette, East Godavari District proposing to acquire the petitioner's land admeasuring Ac.2.10 cents covering in S.Nos.11/1, 11/2 and 11/4 of Kommarajulanka Village, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.J.U.M.V.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The court made the following: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.15029 of 2008 ORDER: The lands situated in Survey Nos.11/1, 11/2 and 11/4 of Komaraju Lanka, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District, are sought to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) for providing house sites to the weaker sections under Indiramma Scheme. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 14.03.2008, whereunder the Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram, was authorized to conduct the necessary enquiry under Section 5A of the Act. The petitioners herein claim title and possession in respect of the lands in question. It is stated that their names were not shown in the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and that since they are the persons interested, they made a representation on 16.06.2008 submitting their objections to the acquisition. It is stated that though the said objections were received by the second respondent, the same were not considered on the ground that their names were not shown in the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the said action, the present writ petition is filed. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the claim of the petitioners that they are also persons interested and that they have submitted their objections on 16.06.2008, without expressing any opinion as to the title claimed by the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the objections raised by the petitioners vide their representation, dated 16.06.2008, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time, status quo obtaining as on today as to the nature and possession of the lands in question shall be maintained. No costs. _________________ 14.07.2008 VGB