E RAVINDER Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioners filed the present writ petition for a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in proposing to construct a parking complex in Old Jail Secunderabad as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the regulation issued by the second respondent in respect of heritage buildings and pass such other suitable orders,

(2.) It is stated that the third respondent herein owns a building popularly known as Old Jail Building complex, Subhash Road, (Monda Market) Secuderabad. The said building has been rented to various individuals including the petitioners herein long back and they have been regularly paying the rents fixed by the third respondent. It is also stated that a portion of the building, which are godowns, had been given to them in the old jail and they are in occupation of the said godown. Opposite to the shops, there is an open space which is being used for the purpose of ingress and egress to the vehicles and in a portion of this space, the third respondent had granted permission for construction of the sulabh complex for public convenience. It is further stated that the Government of Andrha Pradesh had issued G,.O.Ms.No.185, dated 22-04-2006 in exercise of the powers conferred under Regulation 13(1) of the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority Zoning regulations, 1981 made under sub-section (1) of Section 59 of the A.P.Urban Areas (Development) Act 1975 notifying the old jail complex building as a heritage building. It is also stated that in the said notification, the old jail complex has been notified as heritage building of Grade II. It is further stated that the Government had issued various G.Os with regard to conservation of historical area and the building thereon in Hyderabad city, As per the regulations that have been issued by the Government, especially in respect of Grade ll(B) heritage building, it has been specifically mentioned that in addition to the above extension or additional buildings in the same plot or compound, in certain circumstances, be allowed provided that the extension/additional building is in harmony with and does not detract from existing heritage building or height and facade, It is further stated that in so far as the procedure is concerned, it has : been specifically mentioned that the development permission for the changes would be given by the Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, in consultation with the- sub-committee of the heritage conservation committee. It is also further stated that the Government also constituted heritage conservation comprising of certain members, It is further stated that on a reading of the regulations of the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, it is clear that there is a limited scope for changes in respect of buildings which have been notified as heritage buildings and also the procedure for obtaining the permission from the second respondent. It is also further stated that contrary to the said regulation that had been framed by the Urban Development Authority, the third respondent issued a notification, published in Hindu Daily dated 26-06-2006, wherein the third respondent proposed for development of Municipal Markets and parking complexes under Public Private Partnership (PPP) mode and Build Operator Transfer system (BOT) in Hyderabad and Secunderabad, In the said notification in parking complexes, the third respondent had proposed to construct a parking complex in the old jail, Secuderabd in an extent of 968.66 sq. mts, It is stated that the action of the third respondent in proposing to construct a parking complex in the open space in the midst of the old jail complex abutting the godowns on two sides and thereby preventing the ingress and egress to the vehicles conning to the godown and further, constructing the complex contrary to the regulations that have been framed by the Government is illegal and arbitrary, It is further stated that the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority in exercise of the powers under sub-section (1) of Section 59 of the Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act 1975 and with the previous approval of the government had made amendments to the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority Zoning Regulations, 1981. As per regulation 13, the scope for changes for heritage building of a particular grade and the procedure had been prescribed, It is also stated that the proposed construction would be contrary to the regulations which had been framed. It is further stated that the propped parking complex would detract the height and facade, Further, it was stated that the building had been constructed 150 years ago by using lime and sand and any constructions in the vicinity would damage the heritage structure. It is further stated that the regulations specifically provide that the development permission for the changes should be given by the Vice Chairman of HUDA in consultation with the sub committee of heritage conservation committee.

(3.) Sri T.Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel representing the second respondent, had placed before this Court Heritage Conservation Committee 66th meeting minutes dated 31-07-2006 and item No.6 reads as under: "Proposal of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad seeking NOC to construct a parking complex in the central courtyard area of the recently notified Old Jail Complex in Secunderabad near Monda Market. The Heritage Conservation Committee noted that while the MCH has sought an NOC from the Committee, the Shop Owners Association has filed a W.P.No. 14433 of 2006 in the Andhra Pradesh High Court against the proposal. HUDA has been made one of the respondents. The Committee examined the proposal and made the following observations: