IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19680 of 2007 Between: 1 Smt.K.Shyyamala Devi w/o.Dr.Subramanyam K. Naidu M.D R/o.6564, Professional place, suite A Riverdle GA 30274, USA Now residing at Plot No.359, Road No.24 Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad- 33 2 Smt.K.Anjana Devi W/o.Dr. K.Srinivasa Rao R/o.3415, Nash ville, Nederland, Texas 77627,USA rep.by her GPA Holder Smt.P.Kamala Devi, W/o.Late P.Ramachandra Rao, R/o.Plot No.359, Road No.24, Jubilee Hills,Hyderabad-33 ..... PETITIONERS AND 1.The Govt of AP., rep.by its Principal Secretary Revenue Secretariat Buildings, hyderabad 2.The special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling III Floor, Chandravihar complex, Nampally, Hyderabad 3.The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad 4.The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, at 177-Khairataba Hyderabad-4, 5.The District collector, Hyderabad District at Nampally Station Road,Hyderabad 6.The Tahsildar ( Mandal Revenue officer) Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 7.The Tahsildar ( Mandal Revenue officer) Khairatabad Mandal, Hyderabad 8.The Station House officer, S.R.nagar Police station S.R.nagar, Hyderabad-38 9.Mohd.Sirajuddin s/o.Late Mohd.Nizamuddin R/o.Flat No.202, Banjara Hills, Road No.12 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 or order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the actions of the State and its instrucmentalities i.e. respondents 1 to 7 in restoring to take steps for earmarking the petitioners land for the purpose of Indoor stadium treating the petitioners land to an extent of 8101.4 sq.meters in Sy.No.31 of Babbuguda village, previously known as Sy.No.129, of Yousufguda village still as Government land as illegal, arbitrary, malafide unlawful and contrary to 300-A of Constitution of india and consequentially declare that the state and its instrucmentalities i.e. respondents 1 to 7 are estopped in taking any further steps treating the petitioners property to an extent of 8101.4 sq.meters in Sy.No.31 of Babbuguda village,Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as that of the Government even now as illegal, arbitrary, malafide. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.HANUMANTHA RAO Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 7: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.8: GP FOR HOME. The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioners are the owners of land in Sy.No.31 of Babbuguda Village, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which was earlier part of Sy.No.129 of Yousufguda Village, Khairatabad Mandal, Hyderabad. On the basis of a report in Telugu News Daily that the land together with other neighbouring lands would be utilized in constructing an Indoor Stadium, the petitioners have approached this Court. It is stated that the land of the petitioners did not vest with the Government and a reference is made to several proceedings. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.1982 dated 19.11.2005 exempting the land to an extent of 2111.04 sq. mtrs., in favour of the petitioners. Certain other contentions are also advanced. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for revenue. The basis for the petitioners to approach this Court is an item of News reported in a Telugu News Daily. No specific orders are issued by the Government. On instructions, as a matter of fact, a copy of the letter, dated 26.09.2007, addressed to the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, is placed before this Court. According to this, the land in question has not been allotted for the purpose of Indoor Stadium. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, recording the submission made on behalf of the respondents, and leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authorities, if their cause of action still subsists. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date:23.03.2009 sj