S B KIRLOSKAR Vs. HYDERABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HYDERABAD with its twin city of Secunderabad apart from being the Capital of Andhra Pradesh is also famous for its social and cultural history, pearls, pharma and software companies besides being the home of more than seven million population. It is a fast developing sprawling mega city with fast track growth initiatives and - as rumoured; a place for greedy and fortune hunters to make quick buck with speculation, political lobbying and subtle methods of cheating. The growth mine is not only gold mine for such people but a destiny for millions in search of a humble avocation to eke out decent livelihood. The city with less than a million population half a century ago is now spread over 10,000 square kilometres. In addition to irreversible environmental problems, it has also thrown up the problems of immense concern in relation to urban utilities, transport, mobility, movement and day-to-day life. Municipal Corporation of HYDERABAD (MCH) and HYDERABAD Metro Development Authority (HMDA) constituted under HYDERABAD Metro Development Authority Act, 2007 and HYDERABAD Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSandSB) and similar statutory bodies continuously attempt to conceive, plan and implement many projects to make this mega city a citizen friendly habitation. OUTER RING ROAD (ORR)

(2.) IN 1984, a unique urban infrastructure initiative was mooted. It is to put in place an Outer Ring Road (ORR) to reduce urban congestion. The feasibility study for this 'Green Field Project' was done by M/s.Mecon. INitially, it was conceived to construct 109 kilometres four-lane ORR. After bureaucratic revision, the project was enlarged to cover 169 kilometres. The core object of the Project is to build Four-Lane Express Highway with large double trumpet road interchanges to facilitate least cumbersome user friendly collection and payment of toll from road users.' Government's sanction was granted in G.O.Ms. No.442, dated 19.10.2004. HMDA is in the saddle to implement ORR by generating its own funds. The project to be taken up in two phases with a financial outlay of about Rs.6,000/- crores, required 5,500 acres of private land. ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN OF ORR

(3.) SENIOR counsel for petitioners requests us to treat the affidavit accompanying W.P.M.P.No.34380 of 2009 (application for amendment) as a comprehensive one. From this, the case of petitioners in a nutshell may be noticed. The lands owned by the petitioners are sought to be acquired by DN in ORR No.207, dated 14.12.2005, which was originally impugned in the writ petition. However, petitioners amended the prayer seeking to challenge four other DNs being ORR Nos.71, 72, 83 and 122 as amended by ORR No.103. Admittedly, the land sought to be acquired by these four DNs is situated at Kandlakoi village and the alignment of the ORR would pass through the lands of petitioners. They contend that if the road is taken up as per the original approved alignment, ORR will pass through Athivili village, which is at a distance of five kilometres from Kandlakoi. They allege that the alignment was changed thrice to exclude the land belonging to persons who are close to political leaders in power. (The details are adverted to later). The following statement is furnished by senior counsel to demonstrate as to how the lands of petitioners would be affected by the successive DNs impugned in the writ petition.