Telangana High Court
WP/27295/2005 of Oblisetty Manngatayaru, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 December 2005
MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.27295 of 2005 27.12.2005 Between: ... Petitioner AND and others ...Respondents THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.27295 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioner is resident of Dwaraka Tirumala. He is aggrieved by the action of the second respondent in
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.27295 of 2005
27.12.2005Between:... PetitionerANDand others...Respondents THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
WRIT PETITION No.27295 of 2005
The petitioner is resident of Dwaraka Tirumala. He is aggrieved by the action of thesecond respondent in issuing notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of LandAcquisition Act, 1894 (the Act, for brevity) and therefore, invoked the jurisdiction ofthis Court to declare the same as illegal and for an order setting aside the same.
It is the case of the petitioner that the first respondent issued a notification underSection 4(1) of the Act proposing to acquire Acs.0.49½ of the land in varioussubdivisions of survey No.45 including the land admeasuring Acs.0.04½ belongingto the petitioner for the purpose of developing Sri Venkateswara SwamyDevasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala. By the said notification, enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act was dispensed with. The petitioner and others challenged thenotification by filing various writ petitions being W.P.No.5784 of 2004 and batch. Bya common order dated 29.8.2005, this Court disposed of the batch of writ petitionsdirecting the Land Acquisition Officer to conduct enquiry under Section 5-A of the actin accordance with law. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter the enquiryunder Section 5-A of the Act was not completed, but the second respondent issued notices in Form-7 under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act, which is illegal.
The matter was initially listed on 22.12.2005. The matter was adjourned to enablethe learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Land Acquisition) to getinstructions in the matter. After getting instructions in the matter, the learnedAssistant Government Pleader submits that the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Actas directed by this Court is still pending and that in view of the same, the declarationunder Section 6(1) of the Act was not issued. He, therefore, does not dispute theillegality in issuing the notices under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act impugned inthe writ petition.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned notice is set aside. It shallhowever be open to the second respondent to complete the enquiry under Section5-A of the Act and proceed further in accordance with law. There shall be noder asto costs.
December 27, 2005.
_____________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
YS