SRI RAJENDRA AGARWAL AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P No.7753 of 2015 This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 8th respondent-Chief City Planner, GHMC, Hyderabad, in issuing letter No.523/CSC/TP11/WZ/2010/2612, dated 30.12.2010 and the Memo No.F1/A6/689/2003 in CC.No.F1/4143/2004, dated 22.04.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent-Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction being contrary to the statutory provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal, Act, 1999, (for short 'the Repeal Act, 1999') and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution and for a consequential direction to sanction building permission on the application dated 21.07.2010 made by them.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(3.) It is a matter of record that this Court, by order dated 13.12.1999, disposed of the said writ petition being W.P.No.32498 of 1998 appointing two Advocate Commissioners with a direction to take physical possession of the subject land and other piece of land situated at Sy.Nos.105 and 106 of Khajaguda village to an extent of Ac.1.20 gts. That pursuant thereto, the Advocate Commissioners, with the assistance of Mandal Revenue Officer, Revenue Inspector and Village Administrative officer, after identifying the subject land and other piece of land situated at Sy.Nos.105 and 106 of Khajaguda village to an extent of Ac.1.20 gts., took custody of the original title deeds in respect of the said properties from the managing director of the 9th respondent Company, and deposited the title deeds with the Registrar (Judicial) for safe custody. In the said order, a direction was also given to the Reserve Bank of India to take steps for winding up of the 9th respondent-Company. Accordingly, the Reserve Bank of India filed Company Petition No.39/2000 and C.A.No.119/2000, wherein the Company Court appointed Official Liquidator. By orders of the Company Court dated 22.09.2003 in C.A.No.666 of 2003, the assets of the directors of the 9th respondent-Company were directed to be put on sale including the subject land in open auction on 'as is where is and whatever there is' basis. That the petitioners participated in the said open auction and purchased the subject land for total sale consideration of Rs.2,21,00,000.00 and this Court, by order dated 17.11.2003 in C.A.No.666/2003 also confirmed the sale of the subject land in favour of the petitioners being the highest bidders. This Court, vide order dated 09.12.2003 in C.A.No.2012 of 2003, directed the Official Liquidator to handover possession of the subject land to the petitioners and accordingly, possession of the subject land was delivered to the petitioners on the day of registration in their favour vide registered sale deed bearing No.8405 of 2004, dated 12.02.2004 through Official Liquidator. That thereafter, the names of the petitioners were also mutated in revenue records, by the Tahsildar vide proceedings No.B/4584/2004, dated .02.2005.