K MANMOHAN REDDY Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners herein own two plots bearing Nos. 224 and 224-A admeasuring 355 sq. yards each in Sy. No. 51 of Gachibowli Village, serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy district, and there is a title dispute pending in respect of the land in Sy. No. 51 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP. Nos. 6093 and 7013 of 2006, wherein the Hon'ble supreme Court passed orders dated 8. 9. 2006 directing the parties to maintain status quo on the spot. Despite existence of the said status quo orders granted by the Hon'ble supreme Court, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that competent authority under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, regularized some portion of the land in the said survey number under the ULC Act in favour of the unofficial respondents, and the government have also issued G. O. Ms. No. 1816 dated 18. 10. 2005 and G. O. Ms. No. 2183 dated 27. 12. 2005. Thereafter, on the strength of the said G. Os. , the unofficial respondents got a layout sanctioned from respondent No. 4-HUDA and respondent nos. 10 and 11 having obtained permission from respondent No. 8-GHMC for construction of buildings, is making constructions. The learned Counsel submits that since title dispute with regard to the land in question is pending before the hon'ble Supreme Court, the authority under the ULC Act could not have regularized the lands, and the Government could not have issued the aforesaid G. Os. , and consequently respondent Nos. 4 and 8 also could not have sanctioned layout and granted building construction permission to the unofficial respondents, and the action of the aforesaid official respondents, in regularizing the lands, issuing G. Os. , sanctioning layout and granting building construction permission, is violative of the status quo orders granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submitted that respondents Nos. 10 and 11 in the guise of taking up construction in the land in Sy. Nos. 46 and 53, is trying to make construction in the land in Sy. No. 51 in which the petitioners own plots. He submitted that though there are about 588 individuals who are affected by the impugned actions of the aforesaid officials respondents and the constructions being made by respondent Nos. 10 and 11, only two petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

(2.) ON 25. 2. 2008, this Court permitted the Counsel for the petitioner to take out notices to the respondents. The notices having been served, some of the respondents entered their appearance. On 5. 3. 2008, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 gave an undertaking that his clients will not make or proceed with the constructions for a period of ten days. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned on two occasions, to enable the government Pleader for Assignments, appearing on behalf of the Government and the Revenue Officials to get instructions/file counter.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 4-HUDA filed counter. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on their behalf reiterating the counter averments stated that they had approved the lay out presented by respondent nos. 10 and 11 as per the provisions of andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development)Act, 1975, taking into consideration the g. Os. , issued by the Government regularizing the lands. He submitted that the Joint collector, vide letter dated 20. 10. 2007, informed them about the status quo order granted by the Hon'ble Supreme court, and it is only through this letter, did respondent No. 4 come to know about the status quo order passed by the Hon'ble supreme Court. Upon receipt of the same, respondent No. 4 had addressed a letter dated 7. 1. 2008 to the Government to spell out their stand and they are awaiting the response from the Government. He further submitted that respondent No. 4 will take appropriate steps in accordance with law basing on the stand to be taken by the government.