BONDADA SURYANARAYANA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two writ petitions, the acquisition of the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac. 2.93 cents in R.S. No. 51/1C, 50/1B and 50/6B of Dwaraka Tirumala Village and Mandal in West Godavari District for the purpose of Dwaraka Tirumala temple is under challenge. In W.P. No. 23660 of 2013, notification was issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (Repealed Act), 1894 (for short, the Act) and Section 6 declaration dated 09.05.2013 are under challenge and in W.P. No. 25298 of 2013, Section 12(2) notice dated 23.08.2013 and Award No. 13 of 2013, dated 23.8.2013 are under challenge.

(2.) WITH the consent of the learned counsels appearing for respective parties, these writ petitions are considered and disposed of at the admission stage.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner contended that Land Acquisition Officer was not competent to conduct enquiry under Section 5A of the Act and such enquiry is not valid. According to Section 3(c) of the Act, the District Collector alone is competent to conduct an enquiry. Any other person, other than the District Collector, can conduct an enquiry, provided he is authorized to conduct such enquiry by an order in accordance with the provision contained in Section 3(c) of the Act. No such order was passed authorizing the Land Acquisition Officer to conduct enquiry and, therefore, the enquiry under Section 5A is vitiated and accordingly, all the consequential steps taken are also vitiated.