HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.12766 of 2010 Dated: 13-09-2010 Between: Machavarapu Srinivasa Rao & others …Petitioners AND The Vijayawada-Guntur-Tenali-Mandalagiri Urban Development Authority, Vijayawada, Rep. by its Vice Chairman & others. Respondents. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.12766 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This Probono publico has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the order of the first respondent passed in Rc.No.A1-61/2009, dated 30.03.2010 as arbitrary, illegal and without any authority and consequently to set aside the same. By the impugned order, the first respondent permitted the Residential Welfare Association, Chenchupet, Tenali to construct Sri Venkateswara Swamy Vari Temple in the earmarked site which was acquired by first respondent under Integrated Development of Small and Medium Towns Scheme (‘IDSMT’) in the year 1981 over an extent of Ac.0.75 cents in T.S.No.2/3, Block No.1. It is not in dispute that the land to an extent of Ac.0.75 cents situated in T.S.No.2/3, Block No.1, Ward No.1, Chenchupet, Tenali was earmarked for public usage under various heads namely, out of Ac.0.75 cents, an extent of Ac.0.60 cents was earmarked for park/open space and the remaining extent of Ac.0.15 cents was earmarked for religious center. Hence, the writ petition is filed questioning the impugned proceedings issued by the first respondent in according permission for construction of temple over the said area which was earmarked for parks/recreational usage. This Court after taking note of the Land Use Certificate issued by the first respondent, dated 13.5.2010 specifying that the land in T.S.No.2/3, Block No.1, Ward No.1 of Tenali and located in IDSMT scheme, Chenchupet, Tenali is earmarked for recreational use (park) as per the Zonal Development Plan of Tenali, which was approved by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.689, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (I2), dated 30.12.2006, was of the view that unless the Zonal Regulations are relaxed, permitting the land use other than the purpose for which it was notified, the same cannot be put to use for any other purpose by making any sort of construction contrary to the Zonal Development Plan. This Court further directed the first respondent to ensure that the land cannot be used for any other purpose for which it was notified. For vacation of the said interim order, first respondent filed W.V.M.P.No.2477 of 2010 and when the vacate stay petition is taken up for hearing, Sri G.Pedda Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the interim order passed on 04.08.2010. Per contra, learned standing counsel for first respondent would contend that mere allotting the land under the impugned order permitting the Residential Welfare Association to construct a temple will not give rise to any cause of action for filing the writ petition. When the Residential Welfare Association files an application seeking permission for construction of temple, at the time of granting permission, the first respondent will consider whether the land can be put to use for any other purpose other than the purpose for which it was notified under the Zonal Development Plan and on receiving the objections from the locality people, it may decline for grant of permission, and therefore, the present writ petition cannot be entertained. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would contend that as per the Zonal Development Modification to the Master plan of Tenali Town as approved in G.O.Ms.No.689, dated 30.12.2006, under the Residential Use Zone, the land use is permitted for construction of Kalyanamantapams without creating any noise pollution/function halls/public assembly halls, religious centers etc. and therefore, in the absence of any bar contained for use of the land for the purpose of construction of temple, no prohibition can be imposed for the proposed construction of temple. It is admitted by the first respondent that the subject-land has been earmarked for recreational purpose (park) and to the said effect a certificate nomenclatured as ‘Land Use Certificate’ has already been issued on 13.5.2010 stating that the land/site falling in T.S.No.2/3, Block No.1, Ward No.1 of Tenali and located in IDSMT scheme, Chenchupet, Tenali is earmarked for recreational use (Park) as per the Zonal Development Plan of Tenali which was approved by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.689, dated 30.12.2006. As per the Zoning Regulations, under the Residential use zone, the uses permitted other than the dwelling units, are community halls, dharmashalas apart from Kalyanamantapams, function halls, public assembly halls etc. Under the category 5 of land use, namely, public and semi public use zone, all uses not specifically mentioned for the said purpose are prohibited. Whereas under category 6 of land use, namely, recreational use zone, permission for use of the land are; regional parks, all other parks, playgrounds, children traffic parks, botanical/zoological garden, bird sanctuary, clubs, stadiums, outdoor stadiums, picnic huts, holiday resorts, shooting ranges, sports training centers, specialized parks/maidans for multi use, swimming pools, special recreation and special educational areas, bus and railway passenger terminals, libraries, museums, public utilities and facilities such as police posts, fire posts, post and telegram offices, health centers for players and staff. Use of any building or structure is prohibited except the structure required for recreation/tourism promotion, dwelling units except for watch and ward. Once the land was earmarked for the parks/recreational use in the modification of the Master Plan of Tenali Town as approved in G.O.Ms.No.689, dated 30.12.2006, unless the Government relaxes the use of the land for any other purpose than the one notified, the first respondent cannot grant permission for construction of temple if it is prohibited under G.O.Ms.No.689, dated 30.12.2006. Mere allotment of the land for construction of temple will not give rise any cause of action unless permission for construction of temple is accorded by the first respondent on submitting the plans. As and when the plans are submitted with specific proposal for construction of temple, the first respondent is under obligation to consider the prohibition contained under the modified Master Plan issued in G.O.Ms.No.689, dated 30.12.2006. It is under obligation to invite the objections from the residents of the locality including the petitioners and consider the said objections before granting permission. If such construction of temple is prohibited, it is also open for the third respondent to move the Government by filing an application seeking relaxation of the land use and if any relaxation is granted by the Government, it can make its application to the first respondent. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ SEPTEMBER 13, 2010 RAJA ELANGO, J. Tsr.