G YADAGIRI REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these writ petitions, notifications dt.11-9-87 issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, the third respondent, under Section 3 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land) Act, Act No. XXXIII of 1956.(for short 'the Act') are challenged. W.P. Nos. 16075, 17100 and 4890/87, relate to acquisition of the slum known as "Gangidi Yellareddy Compound" (for short 'G.Y. Compound'), Zeera, Secunderabad. WP. Nos. 15330,16202 and 17869/87 relate to acquisition of the slum known as Unnikota, Kavadiguda. As the facts in all the WPs. are common, it would be sufficient to refer to the facts as stated in the affidavit accompanying WP.No. 16075/87.

(2.) The petitioners in the said writ petition are claiming to be owners of houses bearing Municipal Number 6-6-252 to 254, Zeera, Secunderabad on the basis of the partition deed dated 1-7-1972. According to them, the houses in question are their ancestral properties. They are paying municipal taxes assessed on the said houses. The houses were leased to about 24 tenants. The area is situated in Zeera, Secunderabad and is know as G.Y.Gudem by the local political leaders. It is stated that basic amenities like drainage and roads are available to the residents of the said area. In 1983, the petitioners came to know that the area was going to be declared as slum area. So they represented to the Tahsildar, Musheerabad in September 1983 the fact that they are the owners of the properties and the area is having basic amenities and requested for dropping the proceedings. The tenants formed themselves into a society with the help of the local political leaders and the society is known as "Uppalamma Weaker Helpers Association"which is making attempts to have the area declared as slum on the promises said to have been given to them that after such declaration the tenants will be given pattas. The petitioners, it is stated, made several representations which were referred to the District Social Welfare Officer, by the Collector on 11-6-1984. The District Social Welfare Officer gave a report that the area should not be deleted from the declaration under the ACL Thereafter, they made further representations giving ownership particulars and requested to drop further action. Thereafter, it is stated that they learnt that the proceedings were dropped.

(3.) On 20-11-1984, another representation was made to the Additional Special Deputy Collector Land Acquisition, the 2nd respondent herein and the third respondent, which was followed by a further representation. The third respondent held a meeting on August 20,1986 and appointed several committees for reporting as to the necessity of declaring these areas as slum areas with the exception of G.Y.Compound which was directed to be declared as slum immediately. Questioning that action, the petitioners filed WP.No. 13973/86 in the High Court, which was dismissed as premature on January 30,1987 on the ground that the notification under Sec.3(1) of the Act was not issued by then. Notification under Section 3 (1) of the Act was issued on February 25, 1987 and was published in the gazette on March 12,1987 declaring the area as slum area. The notification was challenged in WJP.No.3981/87 in the High Court. Observing that the grounds raised in the writ petition can be agitated before the authority in reply to notice under Section 3(2) of the Act, the writ petition was dismissed on July 24,1987. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has issued notice under Section 3(2) of the Act to acquire the land in question. The petitioners submitted objections to the said notice along with documents and explained the factual position in detail. The case was heard on September 8, 1987 and on September 10, 1987 order was passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting all the contentions without examining them. It is contended that the said orders passed by the 3rd respondent are vague and without any consideration of material. After the said order, notification under Section 3(2) of the act was issued on September 11,1987 and was published in the Official Gazette on September 24, 1987. It is the validity of the notifications issued under Sec.3(2) of the Act that is assailed in this and other writ petitions.