HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17837 of 2003 Date : 01.12.2009 Between : Fazalunnisa Begum. …..Petitioner And Government of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17837 of 2003 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in collecting the impact fee pursuant to issuance of G.O.Ms.No.508, Municipal Administration, dated 15.11.2002, in respect of the premises bearing No.6-3- 894, situated at Somajiguda, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The petitioner was the owner and possessor of the building bearing No.6-3-894, situated at Somajiguda, Hyderabad. To construct a commercial complex in place of the existing building, she made an application to the 1st respondent on 13.05.1998 for change of land use from residential to commercial. On the application filed by the petitioner, the Urban Development authority, constituted under the A.P. Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975, has recommended for change of land use, but for one reason or the other, no final orders are passed by the Government for conversion of land use. In the meanwhile, the Government has identified about 59 roads to be declared as commercial roads and issued draft notification inviting objections. Thereafter, by orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 15.11.2002, the Government has declared 59 roads, which are shown in the Annexure to the said G.O., as commercial roads within the limits of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. The orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 15th November 2002 also empowers the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad to levy and collect the impact fee while permitting construction of commercial buildings at the rate of Rs.50/- per square feet for ground and first floors, and Rs.25/- per square feet for the permitted subsequent floors. 3. When the application of the petitioner was pending consideration, she approached this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No.7079 of 2002, seeking directions for consideration of her application for change of land use. In view of the orders passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 15.11.2002, the said writ petition was disposed of. Thereafter, based on the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.508, the petitioner has applied for grant of permission to construct a commercial complex. When the respondents have insisted for payment of impact fee, she approached this Court seeking declaration that collection of such fee from her is illegal. 4. In this writ petition, it is submitted by Sri K.Prabhaker, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, that the petitioner is not questioning the authority of respondents in levying the impact fee, but it is the submission of the learned counsel that as much as the petitioner had already applied for conversion of land use from residential to commercial vide her application dated 13.05.1998, and inspite of the recommendation by the Urban Development authority, without any valid reason, orders were not passed on her application, but thereafter, the impugned G.O. is issued notifying 59 roads including the road on which the building of the petitioner is located, as commercial roads. It is submitted by the learned counsel that as much as there was no reason for the delay in disposing of her application by the Government, no impact fee can be collected from the petitioner. 5. The said submission of the learned counsel cannot be accepted for more than one reason. Though there were no individual orders passed by the Government for change of land use from residential to commercial, she applied for permission to construct a commercial complex, based on the orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 15.11.2002. Having obtained permission to construct a commercial building by availing the benefit of conversion ordered by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.508, the petitioner is liable to pay the impact fee as indicated in the said G.O. Merely because the application of the petitioner was not disposed of prior to issuing the G.O., it cannot be said that the petitioner is not liable to pay the impact fee. The impact fee imposed in the orders of the Government is only to maintain the roads, infrastructure facilities etc., on account of change of residential area to commercial activity. In that view of the matter, as the petitioner has availed the benefit of change of land use pursuant to issuance of G.O.Ms.No.508, dated 15.11.2002, the respondents have justified their action in collecting the impact fee from her. As no other ground is raised during the course of arguments, I do not find any merit in the writ petition for grant of relief as prayed for. As much as the petitioner has obtained permission by furnishing the bank guarantee pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, dated 31.03.2004, the 2nd respondent-Municipal Corporation is entitled to encash the said bank guarantee. 6. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st December 2009 ajr