SYED JAWEED HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the leasing of private land of an extent of Ac.18.00 gts. situated in Survey No.28 of Miyapur village of Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to the 4th respondent without acquiring under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act by G.O.Ms.No.340, M.A. & U.D. Department dated 8.7.2003 as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, malafide and pass such other suitable orders.

(2.) The third and fifth respondents filed counter affidavits and a reply affidavit was also filed.

(3.) Sri Syed Shareef Ahmed, the learned counsel representing the writ petitioners had taken this court through the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The facts and events commencing from the notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act dated 6-7-1967, Section 5A enquiry dated 24-10-1969 and Section 6 declaration dated 16.4.1970 and Section 9 (3) and Section 10 notices datec 25.2.1972 and also had further drawn the attention of this court to relevant portion of the G.O.Ms.No. 340, MA & UD Department, dated 8-7-2003 showing the same as evacuee property and the stand taken in the counter affidavit to the effect the same is enemy property. The learned counsel also while further elaborating his submissions had drawn the attention of this court to a decision of the Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Raja Mohammed Amir Mohammed Khan, 2005 (7) Supreme 399 and would contend that in the light of the said decision, and also in the light of the land acquisition proceedings referred to supra and the inconsistent stand taken in the counter affidavit to the effect that the property is enemy property despite showing the same as evacuee property in the G.O. in controversy, the writ petitioners are bound to succeed and the writ petitioners in the peculiar facts and circumstances need not be driven to a civil court.