APHC010346862026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 18799 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-3 [3506] Dashradh Ram Nutakki ...Petitioner v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Petitioner: MR. SUBRAMANYAM DARABOINA Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP FOR REVENUE, GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION; & MRS. S.PRANATHI, SC FOR APCRDA. CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 13th July 2026 ORDER: Present writ petition is filed seeking following relief: “(a) to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned preliminary land acquisition Notifications bearing ROC No.102/2026, dated 15.04.2026 and ROC No.103/2026, dated 20.04.2026, issued by the Respondents and quash the same as being illegal, unconstitutional and void ab initio; (b) to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to formally record the Petitioner’s status as a person with permanent locomotor disability in all relevant acquisition records and to structurally engage with and pass a reasoned written order on the three settlement proposals (Option A, Option B, and Option C) 2 CGR, J. W.P.No.18799 of 2026 submitted by the Petitioner on 02.06.2026 within a period of sixty days; and (c) to issue a declaration holding that the deployment of compulsory acquisition powers as an administrative lever to coerce a disabled citizen into a voluntary Land Pooling Scheme without conducting a disability disaggregated Social Impact Assessment and without exhausting less restrictive alternatives under Sections 19 and 46 of the Act of 2013 constitutes a colorable exercise of power and an abuse of statutory authority; and to pass such other order or orders...” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in pursuance to Notifications, dated 15.04.2026 and 20.04.2026, issued under Section 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “the Act”), inasmuch as the petitioner’s properties situated in Survey No.266/2 of Venkatapalem village and Survey Nos.182-1 and 183-1 of Mandadam Village, are sought to be acquired. Objections have been submitted on 26.05.2026 during Grama Sabha and later on 02.06.2026 before the 3rd respondent and that the said objections have not been considered so far and that the respondents are proceeding with acquisition proceedings. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner would urge to direct the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioner before taking a final decision in issuing declaration under Section 19 of the Act. He, therefore, submits that it would suffice to dispose of the writ petition with the above directions. 3 CGR, J. W.P.No.18799 of 2026 3. On instructions, Mrs.S.Pranathi, learned Standing Counsel for 2nd respondent – AP CRDA; and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents 3, 4 and 5, would submit that as per impugned Notifications, the time-frame for submitting objections is 60 days and now that since the objections of petitioner have already been received, the same would be considered strictly in accordance with the enquiry contemplated under Section 15 of the Act. That the respondents are in the process of undertaking such exercise and only, thereafter, the proceedings would be taken to next stage of issuance of final declaration, if any. 4. In view of the aforesaid statement, with the consent of all the learned counsels appearing on either side, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondents to consider the objections of the petitioner, in particular, as submitted on 02.06.2026 in the process of enquiry as contemplated under Section 15 of the Act and pass appropriate speaking orders thereon. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN cs