ORDER :

1. This interlocutory application is filed under Section 151 of C.P.C with a request to suspend the operation of G.O.Ms.No.72 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M) Department dated 25.01.2020, while directing the respondents not to take possession of the subject lands mentioned in the G.O, during pendency of the W.P.(PIL) No.64 of 2020.

2. The three petitioners filed W.P.(PIL) No.64 of 2018 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, invoking pro bono publico to declare the action of the respondents/authorities in deciding to take away the assigned and unassigned agricultural lands in Visakhapatnam District in the name of providing house sites to the poor people in the name of voluntary pooling of land as illegal, unconstitutional and consequently to set-aside G.O.Ms.No.72 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M) Department dated 25.01.2020.

3. It is relevant to advert to the main grounds urged in the writ petition, irrespective of the other pleas which are required to be decided at final hearing. Hence, it is suffice to note the principal contentions raised in the writ petition to decide the interlocutory application.

4. The petitioners are the residents of Anakapalli and Bheemunipatnam villages in Visakhapatnam District. As the Government intended to pool land to an extent of Ac.6116-50 cents in various mandals of Visakhapatnam District for distributing the same as house sites/housing units under the flagship programme ‘Navaratnalu – Pedalandariki Illu Scheme’, the same is now challenged before this Court on the ground that, without following the procedure under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013, the respondents are taking up a short cut method of land pooling, though many villagers are not willing to surrender their lands voluntarily. It is contended that officials of the respondents and the police forces entered into the villages whereas the poor people are not able to approach this Court, the poor are not able to withstand the onslaught of the mighty state. Hence, on account of exerting pressure on the villagers, the State and its instrumentalities are obtaining consent letters and that the concerned authorities issued notice in Form I to the villagers in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.72 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M) Department dated 25.01.2020, calling upon the villagers to file their objections on the proposed land pooling or their consent. It is also contended that, in fact, thirty days time is to be granted for receiving objections, instead of following the guidelines laid down under the Act and Rules framed thereunder, the State instrumentalities adopted a short cut method of pooling even without following the norms fixed under various G.Os and that the State instrumentalities violated the conditions laid down in the G.Os and requested to grant interim stay of the proceedings taken up in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.72 Municipal Administration and Urban Development (M) Department dated 25.01.2020.

5. During hearing, Sri K.S. Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the procedure being followed by the respondents is contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authorities Act, 2016 (for short ‘Act 2016’) and the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority Development Land Pooling Scheme (Formulation and Implementation) Rules, 2016 issued under G.O.Ms.No.290 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (H1) Department dated 14.11.2016 and compelling the public to surrender their lands, obtaining signatures on the proforma as if it is a voluntary surrender under the land pooling scheme is a matter of serious concern and such acts of the State cannot be encouraged. Such forcible obtaining consent by using forces can never be a voluntary surrender or free consent. Apart from that, the respondents issued notice in Form-1 to the petitioners and other villager