JUDGMENT 1. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was issued on 23.12.2012 proposing to acquire land to an extent of Ac. 46.47 cents in Doramamidi Village for rehabilitation of tribals on account of Polavaram Project. Section 5A enquiry was held on 28.01.2013. Draft declaration was published on 28.04.2013. Notice was issued under Sections 9 (3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on 10.06.2013. So far, no award is passed. 2. The petitioner is a tribal. They assail the procedure adopted by the respondent Government in acquiring the land in the notified tribal area without complying with the statutory mandate as envisaged in Section 242 (f) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, ‘the PR Act’) and Section 4 (i) of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the PESA Act’). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is violation of Section 4(i) of the PESA Act in as much as no resolution of Gram Sabha is obtained for acquiring land to an extent of Ac. 46.47 cents in this Doramamidi Village as mandated by the said provision before the acquisition proceedings were initiated. The resolution that is referred to and relied upon is the one which relates to the consent given by the Gram Sabha for the purpose of establishment of Polavaram Project and not for the purpose of rehabilitation Scheme as now intended. Therefore, on that ground, the entire acquisition proceedings are vitiated. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that during the relevant period, there was no elected Gram Panchayat in Doramamidi Village and Special Officers were appointed. In view of the same, no consultation as mandated by Section 4(i) of the PESA Act was followed. However, the Mandal Parishad passed a resolution agreeing for the proposal to acquire the land to an extent of Ac. 46.47 cents for the purpose of providing rehabilitation to the land displaced persons on account of the Polavaram Project. He, therefore, submits that the resolution passed by the Mandal Parishad is sufficient and not obtaining the resolution from the Gram Sabha in view of the fact that Gram Panchayat was not constituted would not vitiate the acquisition process. The learned Assistant Government Pleader placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the Case of SARAPU CHINNA POTHARAJU DORA AND ANOTHER Vs. The learned Assistant Government Pleader placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the Case of SARAPU CHINNA POTHARAJU DORA AND ANOTHER Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKINADA AND OTHERS (2002 (2) ALD 218) to contend that since process was already initiated, interference at this stage is not called for. 5. The PESA Act is a special enactment made to protect the interest of tribals. Section 4 (i) of the PESA Act mandates consultation of Gram Sabha or the Panchayat before initiating proceedings for acquisition of land in tribal areas. It is a mandatory provision carved out to protect the interest of tribals. According to Section 5, the provisions of PESA Act shall prevail over any other provision. Therefore, any deviation from complying with the mandate is ex facie illegal. Even though there is no elected Gram Panchayat, the Special Officer was vested with all the powers of the Gram Panchayat. Thus, nothing prevented the Government in consulting the Special Officer before initiating the process. 6. Even in the SARAPU CHINNA POTHARAJU DORA’s Case (Supra 1), this Court mandated strict compliance of provision contained in Section 242 (f) of the PR Act. This Court found fault in not complying with the PESA Act. However, in the given facts of that case, as the project work was completed and challenge was made only after project was completed, this Court declined to interfere. 7. In the instant case, the acquisition proceedings are not concluded. No award is passed. The proposed land was not utilised for the purpose for which it was meant. The acquisition is for providing rehabilitation and as stated by counsels that stage has not arisen so far. Thus, the action of the respondent authorities in initiating the land acquisition proceedings without complying with the provision in Section 4(i) of the PESA Act is illegal and in the facts of this case, the process initiated by respondent authorities cannot be saved. 8. Having regard to the statutory mandate, the Writ Petition is allowed directing the respondents 1 to 3 to strictly comply with the provision of Section 4 (i) of the PESA Act and take further steps only after consulting the Gram Sabha. The consent of the Gram Sabha shall be in the form of a resolution and respondents 1 to 3 shall proceed further only after obtaining such a resolution. The consent of the Gram Sabha shall be in the form of a resolution and respondents 1 to 3 shall proceed further only after obtaining such a resolution. Since the Mandal Parishad was already consulted, there is no need for the matter being placed before the Mandal Parishad again. The District Collector shall consider the resolution of the Gram Sabha and shall take a decision thereon. The respondents shall take expeditious steps to complete the exercise, preferably within a period of three (3) months. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.