ORDER :

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the notifications issued under Section 4(1) and Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 19.03.1994 and Award dated 01.02.2008 in proceedings No. LA/113/2004 issued by the respondents and all consequential proceedings as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of land admeasuring Ac. 0.08 ¾ guntas in Survey No. 134/2 and Ac. 0-15 guntas in Survey No. 141 of Uppal Bhagat Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District and that the petitioner also purchased Ac. 0.10 guntas of land in Survey No. 133 under agreement of sale, dated 23.06.2003. Due to impugned land acquisition proceedings, the payment of total sale consideration under agreement of sale is deferred. The total extent of Ac. 7.6 ¼ gts in Uppal Bagath Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R. District including the petitioners alone referred lands were notified for acquisition for the purpose of construction of sewerage treatment plant (STP) at Nalla Cheruvu under Section 4(1) and Section 6 of the L.A. Act, dated 19.03.2004. The enquiry under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, was dispensed with by invoking urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the L.A. Act. Consequently, notices under Section 9(3) of the Act have been issued and Award dated 01.02.2008 was passed, the petitioner did not participate in the award proceedings. The lands in Survey Nos. 130, 132 and 133 to an extent of Ac. 2.11 gts and land in Survey No. 131 to an extent of Ac. 0.14 gts was deleted from acquisition on the ground that the land owners are poor and small farmers and are dependants on the lands for their livelihood. It is also contended that after deletion of lands in Survey Nos. 130, 131, 132 and 133/2, the petitioner’s lands in Survey Nos.134 and 141 are two segregated blocks. While excluding lands in Survey Nos.130, 131, 132 and 133, the respondents have arbitrarily included the lands of the petitioner in the acquisition. It is also stated that as the respondent authorities have hastily invoked urgency clause for acquiring the lands, the petitioner is deprived of his valuable right to submit objections under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act. Hence, this writ petition.

4. The 3rd and 4th respondents filed counter affidavit mainly contending in Paras 7, 8 and 9 that as some of the pattedars/land owners represented before the 3rd respondent, before taking possession of their notified lands, stating that they are small farmers and their livelihood is depending on these lands and requested to delete their notified lands from the proposed acquisition and the authorities have considered the said request in respect of Ac. 2.25 gts in Survey No. 130, 131, 132 and 133 of Uppal Bhagath (V). The respondent authority alone can decide which extent is required to be acquired for the STP and not the petitioner and that there is no illegality or arbitral action in invoking urgency clause for initiating land acquisition proceedings in respect of the petitioner’s subject land. It is also contended that the S.O. & C.A. ULC, Hyderabad has also informed that the land owners have not filed declaration under ULC Act. Therefore, it is not possible to pay the 80% compensation to the petitioner and the matter was referred to the civil Court to pay compensation to the rightful owners. The awarded amount has been deposited before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, R.R. District vide office Letter No. LA/113/2003, dated 29.02.2008, as the petitioner has not proved his title and the ownership of the land at the time of award enquiry and dispute existed between the petitioner and the S.O. & C.A. ULC, Hyderabad, which can be resolved only by the civil Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the order dated 22.06.2009 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 18267 of 2004 on the point, that