1. Both these writ petitions relate to the same property and while the petitioners in the former writ petition i.e., W.P.No.23030 of 2015 are owners and the petitioner in the latter writ petition i.e., W.P.No.23923 of 2015 claims to be an agreement holder from the owners and had filed a suit in O.S.No.118 of 2003 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for specific performance of the agreement of sale and the same is stated to be pending.

2. The petitioners in the former writ petition question the notice, dated 16-07-2015 issued by the 3rd respondent under Section 37(2) of the Central Act 30/13 notifying the award and further notice, dated 16-07-2015 for taking possession of the land in question.

3. In the latter writ petition, the petitioner questions the action of the respondents in acquiring the land in question on the ground that the description of the affected land was different in the preliminary notification issued by the 3rd respondent and hence, the acquisition proceedings are vitiated and unenforceable.

4. The facts in brief are as follows:-

(a) The petitioners in the former writ petition claim to be the owners of the lands admeasuring Ac.16-23 gts., and 115 sq. yards including House bearing No.8-3-228 in T.S.No.16/1 and 16/2 situated at Yousufguda Village, Khairatabad Mandal, Hyderbad, popularly known as Janakamma Thota. The petitioners claim title based on registered documents of the year 1960. It is stated that the Urban Land Ceiling proceedings were initiated under Section 6 (1) of the Urban Land Ceiling Act (for short ‘the Act’), which ultimately resulted in determination of surplus extent of 23,930.38 sq. meters. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. While the said appeal was pending, the Special Officer issued notice under Section 10(5) of the Act for taking possession of the land in question. Questioning the said notice, the petitioners have filed W.P.No.3878 of 2001 and the same was disposed of on 07-03-2001 directing the respondent authorities to maintain status-quo pending disposal of the appeal. Thereafter, the appellate authority has dismissed the appeal on 28-04-2001. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed W.P.No.9198 of 2001 and the same was allowed since the Urban Land Ceiling Act was repealed and proceedings were declared as abated by order, dated 08-10-2010. The said order was confirmed in W.A.Nos.1150/2010, 1151/2010 and 30/2011, dated 27-03-2014, against which Review W.A.M.P.No.1546 of 2014 is stated to be pending, at the instance of the Government.

(b) While so, Notification, dated 12-02-2015 was issued by the 2nd respondent under Section 11(4) of the Central Act 30/13 proposing to acquire the land admeasuring 4930 sq. yards in T.S.No.16/2/2. The petitioners filed objections in response to the said notice on 13-04-2015 and thereafter, the 3rd respondent submitted a report to the 2nd respondent. After considering the objections of the petitioners and others, the 2nd respondent rejected the objections by proceedings, dated 27-04-2015 under Section 15(2) of the Act confirming the acquisition proceedings. Thereafter, declaration under Section 19 was issued on 06-05-2015 in Gazette and News Papers showing premises number as 16/2/1/A.

(c) The 3rd respondent thereafter again issued notice under Section 21 of the Act on 05-05-2015, served on the petitioners on 13-05-2015, wherein the premises number was mentioned as T.S.No.16/2/1/A admeasuring 4930 sq. yards. The petitioners state that the property initially notified as T.S.No.16/2/2 and subsequent notice, dated 05-05-2015 mentions a different property covered by T.S.No.16/2/1/A and the said two properties are in different locations. It is contended that the petitioners had no notice or opportunity to file objections with regard to the newly identified property bearing No.16/2/1/A. However, the petitioners submitted their objections to the said notice on 05-01-2