IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17472 of 2008 Between: 1 Smt. N.Uma Devi, W/o. P.Yashodhar, presently residing in USA, Rep by her Regd. GPA HOlder, Mr.N.Sriamulu, S/o. Plot No.65, HMT Shatavahana Nagar, kukatpally, Hyderabad-72. 2 Smt.R.Haritha, W/o. R.Prabhakar Sai Chowdary, R/o. 203, Block No.10, Raintree Park, Kukatpaly Housing Board, Hyderabad-72 ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Deputy Commissioner, Serilingampally, Hyderabad 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Attapur, R.R.District. 4 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rep by its Vice Chairman, Besides City Civil Court, Secunderabad. .....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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declare the notices in LR.No.G/80/BP/549/08 And Lr..NO.G/80/BP/548/08, both dated 03-07-2008 respectively issued by the 1st respondent, rejecting the building permissions to the petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 1st respondents to reconsider the application of the petitioners dated 28-06-2008 and grant building permission to the petitioners, in the light of the Order dated 02.03.2007 passed in W.P.NO.3973/2007, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SHIV KUMAR 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. 17472 OF 2008 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is 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 notices bearing No. Lr.No.G/80/BP/549/08 and Lr.No. G/80/BP/548/08, dated 3-7-2008 where under the building permission application has been rejected by the 1st respondent as arbitrary and illegal. 2. 1st petitioner claims to be the owners and possessor of Plot NO. 414, admeasuring 642 square yards in Survey No. 44/1, situated at Miyapur village. 2nd petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of plot NO. 535, admeasuring 450 square yards in Sy.No. 44/1 situated at Miyapur village. They purchased the plots from Matrusri Co-operative House Building Society Ltd., Hyderabad. A lay out of Matrusri Cooperative House Building 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 Rs. 18,00,000/- towards shortfall of open spaces. The Government of Andhra Pradesh filed L.G.C.No. 29 of 2006 before the Special Court constituted under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 on the ground that it is Government land. In the said L.G.C. the petitioners vendor namely M/s Matrusri Cooperative Housing Society Limited was impleaded as one of the respondents. Pending L.G.C. 29 of 2006 the Special Court by order dated 31-8-2006 in I.A.No. 446 of 2006 directed the respondents therein not to alienate the land. Questioning the same. M/s Matru Sri Co-operative House Building Society filed W.P.No. 3973 of 2007 and the said writ petition came to be allowed holding that there is no prima facie case for granting such relief in favour of the Government. The society informed the result of the writ petition to its members including the petitioners. Some of the plot owners of Matrusri Co-operative House Building Society filed Building Permission Applications. The applications filed by them were rejected on the ground that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella requested the Corporation not to sanction any building permission in respect of the land in Sy.No. 44/1, pending disposal of the L.G.C.No. 29 of 2006. One plot owner namely U.K.V. Subba Rao filed W.P.No. 1861 of 2007 questioning the rejection of building permission. This writ petition came to be disposed of by order dated 16-11-2007 directing the Municipal Corporation authorities to consider the Building Permission Application. Subsequently, similar orders were passed in W.P.No. 2287 of 2008 on 5-2-2008. The petitioners submitted Building Permission Application. Their application came to be rejected on the ground of pendency of L.G.C. case. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in the 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 two others) 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 the society from whom the petitioners purchased the house plots. When similarly situated persons approached this Court, their writ petitions came to be allowed directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the Building Permission Application filed by them. 6. Therefore, in the absence of any legal bar for granting building permission subject to the petitioners satisfying the requirements of section 428 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, the petitioners are entitled to grant of building permission. However, in the event of LGC case which is pending before the Special Court being decided against them, the petitioners shall not claim equities or compensation for cost of the building constructed by them. The respondents shall accordingly consider the applications of the petitioners for granting building permission. 7. With the above observation this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No order as to costs. _____________________________ Justice B.Seshasayana Reddy 19th August, 2008. KM THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO. 17472 OF 2008 19th August, 2008.