IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23730 of 2008 Between: 1 P.Gouri Shankar Rao S/o.P.Venkateswar Rao R/o. MIG-50, Phase II, Dharmareddy Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 2 G.Sree Lakshmi D/o.G.Umamaheswar Reddy R/o. Plot No.66, Jalavayu Vihar Colony, Kukatpally Circle, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Deputy Commissioner, Sherlingampally, Hyderabad. 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District. 4 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority rep. by its Vice Chairman, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or declaring the action of the 1st respondent herein in refusing the applications dt. 27.9.2008 of the petitioners for building permissions in respect of their house plots bearing No. 366/P and 651 situated at Matrushri Cooperative Housing Building Society Limited, Miyapur Village, Serilingampally, Hyderabad Sy. Nos. 44/1 as illegal, arbitrary and un constitutional and consequently direct the 1st respondents herein forthwith sanction the building permission to the petitioners herein and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: (SC FOR MCH CIRCLES 3&5) KALPANA EKBOTE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 23730 OF 2008 ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners who are two in number with a prayer to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to entertain the building permission application as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners herein claimed to be the owners of the plots bearing No.366/P and 651 situated at Matrushri Cooperative House Building Society Limited , Miyapur, Serilingampally, Hyderabad. The layout of the society has been regularized by the Government vide G.O.Ms. No. 249 M.A., dated 23-2-1993. The Government also issued G.O.Rt No. 107, dated 25-1-1994 calling upon the society to pay the total sum of Rs.18 lakhs to HUDA towards short fall of open spaces. The Government of Andhra Pradesh ﬁled L.G.C.No. 29 of 2006 before the Special Court constituted under the A.P. Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 1982 on the ground that it is a Government land in the said L.G.C. The petitioners vendor namely M/s Matrusri Cooperative Housing Society Limited was impleaded as 1st respondent in the L.G.C. The Special Court by an order dated 31-8-2006 in I.A.No. 446 of 2006 directed the respondents therein not to alienate the land and that they should maintain status quo. Questioning the same, the society ﬁled W.P.NO .3973 of 2007 on the ﬁle of this Court and the said writ petition came to be allowed holding that there is no prima facie for granting stay in favour of the society. One of the plot owners namely U.K.V. Subba Rao ﬁled W.P.No. 12861 of 2007 questioning the rejection of building permission. The said writ petition came to be disposed of by an order dated 16-11-2007 directing the Corporation authorities to consider his building permission application. Petitioner NO.1 submitted building permission application and the said application came to be rejected on the ground of pendency of L.G.C. The applications of the petitioners 2 to 6 were not entertained by the Corporation on the ground of the pendency of L.G.C. case. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for the respondents- corporation. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgments of this Court in W.P.No. 12861 of 2007 (U.V.K. Subba Rao Vs. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad and W.P.No. 1833 of 2008 (J.V. Ramapathi Rao and others Vs. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and two others) 5. Indisputably no injunction is subsisting against the petitioners or against the society from whom the petitioners purchased the plot. When similarly situated persons approached this Court, their writ petitions came to be disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider their building permission application ﬁled by them and therefore, in the absence of legal bar for granting the building permission, subject to the satisfying requirements under the provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, the petitioners are entitled to grant of building permission. However, in the event of LGC case which is pending before the Special Court decided against their vendor, the petitioners shall not claim equities or compensation for the costs of the buildings constructed by them. The respondents shall accordingly consider the application of the petitioners for grant of building permission to them. 6. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________________ Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy 31st October, 2008. Note: C.C. in a week B/o KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 23730 OF 2008 23rd October, 2008