IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.19402, 19416 and 19430 of 2010 Writ Petition No.19402 of 2010 Between: Appdidi Mahesh Reddy & others. ..... Petitioners AND The District Collector, Panchayat Raj Wing, Nalgonda District, & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Kuriti Bhaskara Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondents 4&5: Sri P. Raghavender Reddy The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.19402, 19416 and 19430 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Since these three Writ Petitions raise a common issue, they are heard and being disposed of by this common order. The petitioners, who claim to be the bona fide purchasers of certain plots in various survey numbers of Choutuppal Village and Mandal, filed these Writ Petitions questioning the proposed action of respondent Nos.2 to 5 to take possession of their respective plots. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that they are the bona fide purchasers of their respective plots situated in a layout and that it is only after they have purchased the plots, that they have come to know that the developer failed to obtain permission from the competent authority for preparing the layout. They felt aggrieved by the interference of respondent Nos.2 to 5 with the possession of their plots and attempt to lay a fence around the plots. Detailed counter affidavits have been filed by the Panchayat Secretary of Choutuppal Village and Mandal, respondent No.5, wherein it is inter alia stated that the District Collector, Nalgonda has received several complaints of unauthorized layouts and that accordingly he has given appropriate directions to the Extension Officers and the Mandal Parishad Development Officers to identify the illegal layouts and issue notices to the landlords/realtors connected with them. It is further stated that the plots purchased by the petitioners form part of an unauthorized layout made contrary to the Rules notified under G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 26.02.2002 which require the layouts to be approved by the District Town and Country Planning authority or by the authorized agency like HMDA or KUDA. It is further stated that the Mandal Parishad Development Officer issued notices to the petitioners for rectifying the legal lacunae in respect of their plots by proceedings dated 15.05.2010. It is also stated that respondent Nos.3 to 5 instructed the petitioners to get the plots regularized by approaching the authorities concerned. He has denied the averment made by the petitioners that respondent Nos.3 to 5 called upon them to remove the structures existing on their respective plots. It is further averred that as per the extant Rules, 10% of the land proposed in the layout will go to the Gram Panchayath for public utility purpose and also for laying road and other amenities. From the respective pleadings, it is deducible that the petitioners appear to be bona fide purchasers of the plots in unauthorized layouts. Therefore, they need to get their transactions regularized in accordance with the Layout and Building Rules, 2002, as notified in G.O.Ms.No.67, dated 26.07.2002. The petitioners are permitted to approach respondent No.4 with appropriate applications for regularization of the plots purchased by them, within a period of one month from today. On receipt of such applications, respondent No.4 shall process the same and inform the petitioners of the requirements to be complied with by them in accordance with the extant Rules by giving them sufficient time for compliance. If the petitioners comply with those legal requirements within the prescribed time, respondent No.4 shall take appropriate steps for regularization of the plots. Conversely, if the petitioners fail to comply with those legal requirements within the prescribed time, respondent No.4 shall be free to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petitions, WPMP No.24576 of 2010 in W.P.No.19402 of 2010, WPMP.No.24594 of 2010 in W.P.No.19416 of 2010 and WPMP.No.24608 of 2010 in W.P.No.19430 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief are disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 15.02.2011 ES Note:- Issue CC in one week. ES.