K RAMA RAO Vs. COLLECTOR E G
LAWS(APH)-1992-9-13
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on September 21,1992

KARNEEDI RAMA RAP Appellant
VERSUS
COLLECTOR, E.GODAVARI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The lands in question which are notified for acquisition by invoking the provisions contained under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were already the subject matter of acquisition earlier and the same were challenged in W,P, No. 6919 / 81 raising two contentions viz., (1) non-publication of the substance of draft notification under Sec. 4 (1) of the Land Acqusition Act and (2) that the petitioners were small farmers.
(2.)In the said writ petition, while the fourth petitioner herein was the first petitioner, her husband i.e., the father of petitioners 1 to 3 was the second petitioner. As Karneedi Appa Rao, the father of petitioners 1 to 3 and husband of petitioner No .4 had expired, petitioners 1 to 3 combinedly with her mother have filed this writ petition. On verification, I find that the lands which were notified earlier are subject matter of this writ petition also. It is true that if the above writ petition was allowed only on the ground of non-publication of substance of Sec.4(l) notification, the authorities were not precluded from reinitiating proceedings for complying the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. But that is not the situation here. The above writ petition No. 6919 of 1981 was allowed not only on the ground of non-publication of substance of Sec.4(l) notification, but also on the ground that the petitioners therein were small farmers. The issue with regard to small farmers is not a technical issue and touches on merits, as the Governmental instructions warrant that the lands of small farmers should not be acquired as far as possible, unless it is inevitable. When the contention of the petitioners that they were small farmers and that their lands were not liable to be acquired was accepted by this court earlier and the same had become final as stated by Mrs. Rohini, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, there cannot be any acquisition.
(3.)In the circumstances, the acquisition of the lands in question pursuant to the Sec 4 (1) notification, dated 17-2-87 is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.