THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1653 of 2007 ORDER: Petitioners are the owners of about 5363 square yards of land in survey Nos.50 and 94 of Begumpet, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The property is said to have been acquired by their ancestor, by name, D.Manakchand Kochar, through sale deed, dated 08-10- 1964. They intended to make construction over the land. Several proceedings ensued as regards the sanction of plan, change of land use, width of the road, etc. Ultimately, the Government is also said to have issued G.O.Ms.No.213, dated 21.02.2006, exempting the land from the purview of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act. According to the petitioners, the width of the road that comes in front of the premises is 120 feet and that the officials of the respondents are proposing to take part of their land by treating the width of the road as 150 feet. The petitioners submit that in case the respondents want their land for the purpose of widening of the road, proceedings under Sections 146 and 147 of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), are to be initiated. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. It is not clear as to whether the petitioners were accorded any permission to make construction or whether they have given any set back. It is not uncommon that roads in the city are widened to meet the traffic congestion. In such cases, the properties abutting the roads are affected. If the owner of the property has given a set back as a condition for according permission for construction, the affected portion would naturally vest in the Municipal Corporation. No compensation needs to be paid for it. On the other hand, if the affected property did not vest in the Corporation in any manner, it can be taken over either with the consent of the party or by initiating proceedings under Sections 146 and 147 of the Act. In the instant case, the respondents have not informed the petitioners anything about their intention or action. When valuable rights of the petitioners are involved, the respondents are supposed to follow the relevant provisions of law. While admitting the writ petition, this Court passed an interim order and thereby, the rights of the petitioners are protected. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall not take possession of any property held by the petitioners, unless relevant provisions, under which, it has vested in them, are shown to the petitioners or proceedings under Sections 146 and 147 of the Act are initiated. It shall also be open to them to assume possession, in case the petitioners give their consent, subject to any conditions. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 3rd February, 2011 VJL/KDL