Heard Sri G.Venkateswara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the leaned Asst. Solicitor General for Respondent No.1 and Sri Kakara Venkat Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 2 to 5 and Sri Ch.Samson Babu, learned counsel for Respondent No.6 and perused the counter affidavit filed by R.6 adopted by Respondents 2 to 5 and rejoinder to the counter and reply filed by them and also the documents placed reliance by the parties and the provisions and propositions and the Writ Petition with supporting affidavit and the application to amend the prayer in the writ petition.

2. The prayer in the original Writ Petition reads as follows:-

“To issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notification S.O.416(E), dated 16.012.2016 published in the Gazette of India No.3045 dated 23.12.2016, for acquiring the petitioner’s property in an extent of 0.146 hectors in Sy.No.208 and 0.138 hectors in Sy.Nos.207 (Ac.0.36 in Sy.No.208 and Ac.0.34cents in Sy.No.207 as per the notice dated 11.01.2017) situated at M.Nagulapalli village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, West Godavari District, issued by the official respondent authorities, as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and against norms of public policy and principles of natural justice, and in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 300 A of Constitution of India and to quash the same and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

The amended prayed as per the Crl.P.M.P.No.27655 of 2017 reads as follows:-

“to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned notification S.O.4161(E),dated 16.12.2016 published in the Gazette of India No.3045 dated 23.12.2016, for acquiring the petitioner’s property in an extent of 0.146 hectors in Sy.No.208 and 0.138 hectors in Sy.Nos.207(Ac.0.36 in Sy.No.208 and Ac.0.34 cents in Sy.No.207 as per the notice dated 11.01.2017) situated at M.Nagulapalli village, Dwaraka Tirumala Mandal, West Godavari District, issued by the official respondent authorities and the notification S.O.1137(E),dated 29.03.2017 issued under Section 6 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline(Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962(for short, the Act’) and the order dated 21.02.2017 passed by the 5th respondent authority, as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and against norms of public policy and principles of natural justice and in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 300-A of Constitution of India and to quash the same and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the inters of justice.”

3. Despite opposed by the respective respondents to the writ petition, the amendment is allowed to sub-serve the ends of justice.

4. The issues involved in the Writ Petition are:-

1. Whether public interest is different to public purpose?

2. Whether there is compliance with the statutory requirement of Section 5 and 6 of the Act, including by personal hearing pursuant to Section 3 of Publication of the notification for the acquisition intended?

3. Whether there is any change of alignment, as raised in the reply affidavit of the petitioner as additional ground though not originally covered in the Writ Petition averments?

4. Whether the laying of the pipeline is redundant, unnecessary from nearby existing pipeline from which gas can be drawn to meet the purpose by R.3 to R.6?

Coming to the first aspect as to impugnment of the very notification, Section 3 of the Act, reads as follows:-

3. Publication of notification for acquisition.

(1) Whenever it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transport of petroleum 2 or any mineral] from one locality to another locality pipelines may be laid by that Government or by any State Government or a corporation and that for the purpose