KONDAPALLY BAPAYYAMMA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three points have been raised by the petitioner to dislodge the notification issued under section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act completely. Firstly it is stated that publication of the substance of the notification in the village is not in accordance with either the Statutory provisions or the authoritative pronouncements. Secondly the lands are valuable ones and therefore prior permission of the Government will have to be obtained. Thirdly the lands have been acquired for the benefit of the residents of another revenue village where also lands are available but not acquired-more so, in ordar to have access to the acquired land huge amount will have to be spent for construction of a bridge. It is needless to deal with the latter two points as the Writ Petition will have to be allowed on the very first point.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the substance of the notification is said to have been published by way of torn torn in the village. So, the question is whether this is adequate compliance of the provisions. In this regard, section 4(1) of the Act may be noticed which reads :

(3.) For the proposition that once endorsement is made, it must be taken to be sufficient publication, reliance has been placed on N Somi Reddy vs. State (2) AIR 1977 A P Page 377 and I. Umamahhswara Rao vs State (3) AIR 1981 A P page, 70.