IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 27024 of 2006 Between: 1 Jambulla Venkat Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, R/o. Sangalapalli Village, Veerapunayunipalli Mandal, Kadapa District. 2 Jambulla Venkat Krishna Reddy, S/o. Venkat Reddy, R/o. Sangalapalli Village, Veerapunayunipalli Mandal, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Irregation & Command Area Development(PW), Department, Secretariat,Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District. 3 The Special Deputy Collector(LA), GNSS Unit-II, Kadapa. 4 The Executive Engineer, G.N.S.S.Division, Proddutur, Kadapa District. 5 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Veerapunayunipalli Mandal, Kadapa 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents not to take possession of the petitioners' land,an extent of Ac.20.76 cents, situated in Sy.No.356 of Indukuru Village, Veerapunayunipalli Mandal, Kadapa District, without acquiring and paying compensation for the same and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 27024 of 2006 ORAL ORDER: The petitioners and the respondent Nos. 6 and 7 are rival claimants to the ownership and possession of agricultural lands in an extent of Ac.20-76 cents in survey No. 356, Indukuru village, Veerapunayunipalli mandal, Kadapa district. The writ petition is filed alleging that on account of the Galeru Nagari Srujala Sravanthi Project (popularly known as G.N.S.S. Project), the subject lands face potential liability for submergence on the completion of the Project and therefore ought to have been acquired by the respondents which has not been done. Though in the counter affidavit the official respondents took a plea that the lands are government lands and therefore need not be acquired even on submergence, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that after the counter affidavit was filed the official respondents have initiated proceedings for acquisition of the lands under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). In the light of the above development reported by the learned counsel for the petitioners, which fact is acceded to by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and Sri P. Veera Reddy, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 and 7, no further proceedings are warranted in this writ petition. Whether the petitioners or respondent Nos. 6 and 7 or both are entitled to the compensation amount for the lands acquired will have to be determined in the proceedings under the Act. Needless to state that acquiring authority will afford an opportunity for participation in the award enquiry both to the petitioners and the respondent Nos. 6 and 7. The writ petition is disposed of as above after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for official respondents and Sri P. Veera Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 6 and 7. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 23-06-2008 Pvks/*