CHANDRAMOULIPRASAD DEVABHAKTUNI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) D. Chandramouli Prasad has filed this Writ Petition to quash the notification made under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act which was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 23-12-1971 and also the notification issued under section 6 of the Act which was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 18-2-72.

(2.) The Government wanted to acquire Ac. 4-09 cents belonging to the petitioner in S. Nos. 172/1 and 172/2 of Hanumojipalem village for providing house sites for the Harijans. According to the counter filed on behalf of the Government it is stated that the notification under section 4 (I) of the Act was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 13-1-72. Under that notification the provisions of Section 5-A were dispensed with under Section 17 (4) of the Act. Notification under Section 6 was published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette dated 6-4-72. Notices under Section 9(1) and Section 10 of the Act were duly promulgated and served on the persons interested in the manner prescribed under the rules. The petitioner acknowledged the receipt of the notice on 21-6 72. Award enquiry was conducted on 10-72. The petitioner attended the enquiry on that date and consented for the acquisition and payment of compensation. It is stated that the award could not be passed immediately for want of sufficient funds. The award was passed on 10-3-76. Even before passing the award the petitioner was personally contacted by the Land Acquisition Officer on 4-2-1976 and the petitioner gave a statement stating that he has no objection but he also agreed for non-payment of cost for the existing structure (Chapta) on the land acquired. Thereafter on 15-3-76 the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the acquisition proceedings.

(3.) His objections are first the enquiry under Section 5-A should not have been dispensed with. Secondly there, was no publication in the locality of the substance of the notification as contemplated by Section 4(1) of the Act. Thirdly, in view of the long delay in passing the award, the acquisition proceedings should be started afresh and thereby he would have the benefit of the difference in the market value of the land. Fourthly, under Section 17 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1973 herein after called the Ceilings Act the Government cannot proceed further with the acquisition proceedings because it is an alienation within the meaning of that section.