IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24426 of 2008 Between: 1 M.R.Parthasarathi S/o.M.Ramaiah Resident of Kothacheruvu village Anantapur District 2 M.narasimha Murthy S/o.M.Ramaiah Resident of Kothacheruvu village Anantapur District ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Collector (Land Acquisition) Anantapur District 2 The REvenue sub-Collector, Penukonda, Anantapur District 3 The Mandal Revenue officer, Kothacheruvu Revenue Village, Anantapur 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 holding the action of the respondents in issuing the notiﬁcation under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquring the petitioners lands in SY.no.48101 Kothacheruvu village, Kothacheruvu Mandal, Anantapur District of an extent of Ac.5.22 as illegal, unconstitutional consequently set aside the said notification and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.HANUMANTHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.24426 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners claim to be the owners of land in various survey numbers of Kothacheruvu Village and Mandal, Ananthapur Di stri ct. The 1st respondent published notiﬁcation dated 15.10.2008 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) proposing to acquire the land of the petitioners admeasuring Acs.5.22 cents for the purpose of providing house sites to the eligible poor. The petitioners contend that vast extents of government lands are available within the vicinity and their lands are chosen on political considerations. Other grounds are also urged. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. The notiﬁcation dated 15.10.2008 did not dispense with the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. During the course of enquiry under that provision, the petitioners can put forward all their contentions including the one relating to availability of alternative lands. Respondents 1 and 2 are under obligation to consider the objections raised by the petitioners. The question of dispossessing the petitioners does not arise unless the proceedings assume finality with the passing of the award. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that it shall be open to the petitioners to raise all the objections in the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the same. The 1st respondent shall pass a reasoned order dealing with the objections. It is also directed that the possession of the petitioners shall not be interfered with unless and until declaration under Section 6 of the Act is published and an award under Section 11 of the Act is passed. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 07-11-2008 Note: C.C. in three days. B/o. Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}