THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2741 of 2008 Date: 12.02.2008 Between: Syed Habibulla Bukhari & others. … Petitioners AND State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by The District Collector, Kadapa, Kadapa District, A.P., & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri A. Srinath Counsel for the respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2741 of 2008 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to quash Notification dated 26.09.2007 and Declaration dated 21.01.2008 issued under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) respectively. Different extents of the properties belonging to the petitioners are proposed to be acquired under the impugned notification. The petitioners filed their objections in the enquiry held under Section 5A of the Act, which were considered by respondent No.2 after giving them an opportunity of personal hearing. Thereafter, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 21.01.2009. The petitioners challenged the said proceedings. Sri A. Srinath, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the names of the petitioners are not mentioned in the impugned notification and therefore the same is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that there are variations in the extents mentioned in notification and declaration issued under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Act and therefore the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act is liable to be set aide. I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and I have not felt persuaded to accept the same. Even if the contention of the petitioners that their names are not shown in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act is correct, still it need not be invalidated only on that ground, because the petitioners, on coming to know about the publication of the notification, filed their objections in the enquiry held under Section 5A of the Act, which was duly considered. Thus, non-mentioning of their names in the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act has not caused any prejudice to the interests of the petitioners. With respect to the contention that in the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, larger extents are shown whereas in the Declaration made under Section 6, lesser extents are shown, in my considered view, variations in extents resulting in reduction in the area to be acquired, works to the advantage of the petitioners. Ordinarily, the property, more than what is notified under Section 4(1) of the Act, cannot be acquired. In a converse case such as the present one where lesser extents are shown under 6 Declaration, the same is to the advantage of the petitioners in the sense that the respondents will be acquiring lesser area of property. Except saying that had the petitioners known about the exact property that was proposed to be acquired at the Section 5A enquiry stage, their line of objections would have been different, neither the petitioners indicated in their pleadings as to the nature of objections in the event of lesser extents being notified nor their counsel pointed out the same during the hearing. In my considered view, there is no merit in the contention of the learned counsel that reduction in extents of acquisition mentioned in 6 Declaration had, in any manner, prejudiced the interest of the petitioners. It is not in dispute that the impugned acquisition is being made for an overwhelming public purpose, namely, widening of Trunk Road in Kadapa Corporation area. In the absence of any legal infirmity pointed out by the petitioners, I am not inclined to invalidate the acquisition proceedings intended for such an important public purpose by entertaining this writ petition. For the abovementioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.3529 of 2008 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 07.02.2008 ES