IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21310 of 2003 Between : Mohd. Abdul Subhan Khan S/o. Mohammed Abdul Wahab Khan R/o. 9-4-87/1/A, Tolichowki, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Assistant City Planner, Circle No.4, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad., Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 2 Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tankbund, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in serving the Impugned Notice No. 321/TP/C4/MCH/RW/2003 dated 28-08-2003, seeking the consent of the petitioner for surrendering the land admeasuring 87.61 sq. yards of his premises bearing No. 9-4-87/1/A, situated at Toli Chowki, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and in violation of Sections 146 and 147 of the H.M.C. Act and the Judgment dated 19-2-2003 rendered in W.P. No. 3052 of 2003, and consequently restrain the respondents from demolish or dispossessing the petitioner from the above premises, without following the due process of law. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.MOHD.ZIA-UL-HAQ Counsel for the Respondents : R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY(SC FOR GHMC,SNCZONE) The Court made the following : ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the notice issued by the 1st respondent in Proceedings No.321/TP/C4/MCH/RW/ 2003, dated 28th of August 2003. 2. By the aforesaid notice, the 1st respondent-Assistant City Planner has notified to the petitioner to part with his land admeasuring 87.61 square yards in the premises bearing No.9-4-87/1, situated at Toli Chowk, Hyderabad, for the purpose of road widening. It is stated that the respondents are willing to pay compensation for the structures existing in the said premises, apart from giving concessions as notified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.483, dated 24th August 1998, for re- development of the remaining area. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that without fixing the amount of compensation for his valuable land, he cannot be dispossessed from his house property. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents that the said house property of the petitioner is not yet taken possession, but it is required for road widening. It is submitted that the respondents are intending to negotiate with the petitioner for fixing the amount of compensation as contemplated under Section 146 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. It is further submitted that if an agreement is not arrived at during the negotiations with the petitioner, respondents will take due course to provisions under the Land Acquisition Act. 4. A reading of the impugned notice indicate that the petitioner was asked to exercise his option with regard to giving consent to hand over advance possession of his house property. It is for the petitioner whether to accept or not, having regard to the offer made by the respondents. In view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel, this writ petition is disposed of, permitting the respondents to negotiate with the petitioner on the amount of compensation payable for the structures, as well as the land, required for the purpose of widening the road from Nanal Nagar X roads to Toli Chowki X roads. It is also made clear that in the absence of any consent from the petitioner, it is open for the respondents to take steps for acquisition of the property, which is required for the purpose of road widening, by resorting to the provisions contained under the Land Acquisition Act. Except in accordance with the procedure referred above, petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the property in question. 5. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 31st July 2009 ajr