IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 349 of 2005 Between: 1 Balireddy Appala Naidu S/o.Durgai 2 Koribelli Apparao S/o.Late Apparao 3 Salapu Appalanarasamma W/o.Late Karribabu 4 Salapu Apparao S/o.Late Atchayya 5 Thantati Kamala W/o.Apparao 6 Medisetti Pydamma W/o.Dharmaraju 7 Balireddy Appalaraju S/o.Apparao 8 Kondrakota Appalaraju S/o.Tatabbai 9 Namballa Vanajakshi W/o.Muralidhar Rao 10 Kottara Pydaiah S/o.late Govaraiah 11 Bonda Narasamma W/o.late Appanna 12 Bonda Jagadeeshwar Rao S/o.Durganaidu 13 Balireddy Appalanarasamma W/p.Appalanaidu 14 Nati Venkata Jagannadha Rao S/o.Venkanna 15 Koribilli Adinarayana S/o.Appalaswamy 16 Salapu Ammatalli S/o.Ramulu 17 Balireddy Babu Rao S/o.Apparao 18 Gosukonda Laxmi W/o.Bhargav 19 Balireddy Adlikshmi W/o.Balireddy Ramana 20 Kosuri Mahalakshmi W/o.Polaiah 21 Badarada Savithri W/o.K.Raju ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Dist Collector Visakhapatnam Dist Visakhapatnam Dist. 2 The Special Officer (Land Acquisition) VUDA,Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam dist. .....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 any Writ order or Direction especially in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not receiving the representation of the petitioners dt 2-1- 2005 is arbitrary, illegal and directing the respondent to consider the petitioners representation dt 2-1-2005 and pass such further or order orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.S.C.BOSE Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SMT SUMALINI REDDY The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER: The petitioners claim to be bona fide purchasers of various extents, totaling Ac.1.00 in different survey numbers, situated at Akkireddypalem, Visakhapatnam District. The petitioners allege that on coming to know of passing of land acquisition proceedings in respect of their lands, they made representation dated 02.01.2005 to the respondents, requesting them to delete their lands from the acquisition proceedings, but the same is not being considered. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Both the counsel agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the stage of admission. On a perusal of the record, it reveals that land acquisition proceedings were took place in the year 1987 and award No.3 of 1989 and 10 of 1989 were passed on 10- 3-1989 and 15-7-1989. Merely an averment was made in the writ petition stating that they had made several representations to the authority to denotify and delete the subject land from section 4 (1) notification and except the legal notice issued on 2-1- 2005 i.e., which was issued after lapse of about six years, no material was filed. The petitioners also not explained the reason as to why they had kept quiet all these years. In the circumstances of the case, I see no reason warranting interference in this matter and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed for laches. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Dated: 27.01.2005 Dsr/Tvk. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To: 1 The Dist Collector Visakhapatnam Dist Visakhapatnam Dist. 2 The Special Officer (Land Acquisition) VUDA,Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam dist. 3 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 4 Two CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MVK}