NANDIPATI SOMIREDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are challenging in this petition the acquisition Survey Nos. 710/1, 710/2 and 710/4 admeasuring Ac. 1-95 cents for the purpose of constructing an electric sub-station. The acquisition has been made at the instance of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 4-3-1976. The notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 20-5-76 was published on 3-6-1976.

(2.) Mr. R. Venugopala Reddy who appears for the petitioners has raised before me three contentions. Firstly he has contended that the substance of the notification issued under Section 4 was not published at convenient places in the locality. The second contention which he has raised is that about six years ago land bearing Survey No. 109 had been acquired for constructing this very sub-station and that proposal was dropped. Now this land is sought to be acquired by invoking the provisions of Sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act. According to him therefore this acquisition is mala fide. The third contention which he has raised is that to south of the land under acquisition the petitioners have other lands, which if this land is acquired, would have no access whatsoever from any direction and that it would be rendered totally useless and inaccessible to the petitioners.

(3.) So far as the first contention is concerned it has been stated in the counter-affidavit that the substance of the notification under Section 4 was published in the village on 10-3-1976. However, it has been argued by Mr. R. Venugopal Reddy that it was not published at the convenient place, that is to say, near the land under acquisition. In my opinion if the substance of the notification under Section 4 was published in the village to which the land under acquisition belongs it is more than sufficient to satisfy the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act. It cannot in that case be said that it was not published at the convenient place in the locality. The first contention raised by the learned counsel is therefore without any substance and is rejected.