1. These two Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they relate to acquisition of land under the same notification.

2. The petitioners claim that they are the owners of various properties mentioned in the affidavits. The second respondent published a notification on 12.07.2005 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act) in Deccan Chronicle for acquiring a total extent 629.47 square yards of land including the properties of the petitioners for widening of the road from Charminar to Hari Bowli Junction (Reach I) under Charminar to Falaknuma (Charminar Road), situated at Shaher-e-Hyderabad Village, Bahadurpura Mandal of Hyderabad District. The petitioners were asked to submit their objections by issuing appropriate notices under Section 5A of the Act. They submitted their objections. When the petitioners were asked to attend for an award enquiry by issuance of appropriate notices under Sections 9(1), 9(3) and 10 of the Act, without furnishing a copy of the order passed under Section 5A of the Act, they filed W.P.Nos.23367 of 2008 and 9962 of 2006 respectively challenging the order dated 19.12.2005 passed under Section 5A of the Act. When W.P.No.9962 of 2006 was dismissed by order dated 18.08.2008, W.A.No.932 of 2008 was filed. The said Writ Appeal along with W.P.No.23367 of 2008 was considered and both cases were allowed by order dated 12.12.2008 setting aside the order dated 19.12.2005 and directing the concerned authority to forward the objections with its remarks to the Collector and the Collector was directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In pursuance of the said order, the second respondent issued a notice on 26.02.2010 asking the petitioners to appear before him on 15.03.2010 and file written objections. It is the case of the petitioners that even before receiving the said notice, they filed their written objections on 26.02.2010. In those circumstances, they appeared before the second respondent on 15.03.2010 through their Counsel and submitted a memo requesting the second respondent to furnish the copy of remarks from the requisitioning department to the written objections filed by them on 26.02.2010 under Rule 3(b) of the Rules framed under Section 55 of the Act. On receiving the memo, the case was posted to 18.03.2010, the required para-wise remarks were served on 18.03.2010 and the case was adjourned to 22.03.2010. The petitioners sent an application on 22.03.2010 by registered post with acknowledgement due for summoning the record from the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and also submitted a representation on 23.03.2010 to the first respondent complaining about the highhanded action in not receiving their representation dated 22.03.2010 while conducting the proceedings. In those circumstances, the second respondent passed an order on 23.03.2010 rejecting the objections filed by the petitioners. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petitions were filed.

3. This Court, by order dated 19.04.2010 in W.P.No.8380 of 2010 granted interim stay of dispossession for a period of ten days, which was later extended. While granting interim stay of dispossession on 28.04.2010 in W.P.No.9112 of 2010, this Court directed the said matter to be posted along with W.P.No.8380 of 2010.

4. The petitioners filed appropriate applications seeking amendment of the prayer challenging the notification dated 12.07.2005 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act and the applications for such amendments were allowed. Seeking vacation of the interim orders, vacate petitions were filed in both the Writ Petitions on similar lines, and the said petitions are also taken up for consideration along with the present Writ Petitions.

5. In the affidavit filed in support of the vacate petition in W.V.M.P.No.1672 of 2012 in W.P.M.P.No.11771 of 2010 in W.P.No.9112 of 2010 it is stated that the Assistant City Planner, Circle–I, GHMC, Hyderabad, placed a requisition on 19.02.2005 for a