C.SURYANARAYANA MURTHY Vs. GOVT. OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions are being disposed of by way of a present common order as they relate to the same piece of land and challenge essentially the same proceedings of the official respondents.

(2.) Heard Sri M.L. Ali and Sri S. Sree Rama Chandra Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for land Acquisition, appearing for the respondents.

(3.) W.P.No.8542 of 2006 was filed by nine persons. The 1st petitioner claims to be the owner of 69 cents of land in R.S.No.63/6 of Prasadampadu, Vijayawada Rural Mandal, Krishna District. Petitioners 2 to 9 are said to be the tenants of the 1st petitioner. This fact is admitted by the 1st petitioner in his affidavit. In 1994, the Sub Collector, Vijayawada initiated land acquisition proceedings for acquiring the aforesaid land for the purpose of construction of a telephone exchange building. On 5/7/1994, necessary notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in the A.P. Gazette. Subsequently, substance of the notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was also published in two local newspapers on 15/7/1994. A notice under Sec. 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 17/9/1994 and an enquiry was conducted there on. After completion of the said enquiry, a declaration under Sec. 6 was published in the Gazette on 5/5/1995 and the substance of the said declaration was also published in two Telugu daily news papers on 1/6/1995. At that stage, about 19 persons approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by way of W.P.No.26001 of 1995 claiming that their possession and enjoyment of the said 69 cents was being disturbed by the official respondents without following the process and procedure laid down under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. On 24/11/1995, a direction was issued in the above writ petition directing the official respondents therein not to dispossess the petitioners from the land without following due process of law. Thereafter, there was absolute silence on the part of the official respondents which is said to have forced the 1st petitioner herein to file W.P.No.16682 of 2003 seeking a direction of early completion of the land acquisition proceedings. The erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by way of interlocutory proceedings dtd. 23/9/2003 directed the official respondents to complete the land acquisition proceedings within a period of six weeks. As no action was being taken against this direction, a contempt notice was given by the 1st petitioner to the official respondents to implement the orders dtd. 23/9/2003, issued by the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh.