IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 360 of 2005 Between: Abdullah Ibrahim S/o.late Abdul Majeed 22-3-709,Purani Haveli Hyderabad-500 024. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Municipal Administration &Urban Development Dept., Govt of A.P.rep y its Secretary, Hyderabad. 2 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority rep by its Vice-Chairman, Begumpet, 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 or direction more particularly Mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent to stop the fencing work on the border of Road preventing the facing the petitioner and others houses and lands and thereby preventing the petitioner from using the Road and enjoying the beautification of Tank itself in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.LAXMAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. Counsel for the Respondent No.2: M.DHANANJAY REDDY (SC FOR HUDA) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner seeks to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to stop the fencing work on the border of road preventing the petitioner and others from using the road. It is the case of the petitioner that he has entered into agreements of sale dated 12.03.2001 and 10.02.2003 for purchase of plot No.12 in Sy.No.5/AA/3 admeasuring 363 square yards and Plot No.13/B in Sy.No.5/AA/3 admeasuring 142 square yards situated at Shivarampally Jagir village, Rajendranagar Muncipality, Ranga Reddy District. It is further stated that the petitioner also entered into agreement for purchase of Ac.1.00 cents from Sri S.Shankaraiah vide agreement of sale dated 23.05.1998. It is further stated that the petitioner constructed the house in some other plot and intends to sell the same to the intending purchasers and the municipality also assessed the municipal tax for two houses over the plot Nos.12/A and 13/B bearing House Nos.10-127/1/G and 10-127/1/H. While so, the respondents have taken steps to fence all along the Miralam tank preventing the petitioner from ingress and aggress to the main road. A counter has been filed by the 2nd respondent stating that the petitioner has no right, title or authority in respect of the alleged Ac.1.00 cents land or the aforesaid two plots pursuant to the agreement of sale. It is stated that Sy.No.5 of Shivarampally Jagir is in the tank bed area of Mir Alam Tank within the full tank level. It is further stated that the respondents have proposed for acquisition of land of an extent of Ac.10.21 guntas in Sy.Nos.5, 12 and 13 of Shivarampally Jagir for construction of sewerage treatment plant No.2 and notification was issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of the said land. It is stated that there are 12 pattadars in Sy.No.5 of Shivarampally Jagir and the so-called vendor S.Shanakraiah is the 9th pattadar. It is stated that the respondents did not lay the road of 80 feet wide, but they have formed a peripheral bund of 30 feet wide around the Mir Alam Tank. It is stated that the land acquisition proceedings in respect of Sy.No.5 are pending and physical possession has not been taken so far. It is stated that the land claimed by the petitioner is in the full tank level and it is under submergence for most of the period and also during the monsoon overflow of Noor Mohd. Kunta and Shivarampally Cheruvu will enter the Mir Alam Tank through the said land. The illegal two sheds, which are in the dilapidated condition, will be removed after taking over the physical possession of the said land after completion of land acquisition proceedings. It is stated that for restoration of Mir Alam Tank, the said action has been taken. It is further stated that 30 feet wide peripheral bund formed all along the periphery of the bund is proposed for protection of the Mir Alam Tank from the further encroachments and also to develop into a walk way gardens with pathways and greenery duly fencing the habitation side but not towards road as contended by the petitioner since all the existing slums will be connected with the cement concrete internal roads developed by the local municipality under various slums development schemes. The purpose of formation of peripheral bund and chain link fencing all along the peripheral bund towards the habitation side had already taken up to protect the land. The petitioner is claiming his right and title through his vendor, S.Shankaraiah. It is stated that the land acquisition proceedings were already initiated. Unless the land acquisition proceedings in File No.LA/25/HUDA/2003 are completed and the award is passed, the lands in Sy.No.5 cannot be taken away either from the possession of the petitioner or the original owner or the vendor. The only controversy in this writ petition is with regard to fencing work on the border of the road preventing the petitioner and others. In the circumstances of the case, as it is categorically stated in the counter that on the road side, there is no fencing but on the bund side only fencing has been made. However, I am of the opinion that as long as the land acquisition proceedings are completed and the land is acquired, there cannot be any fencing in respect of the lands situated in Sy.No.5 belonging to S.Shankaraiah. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:10.03.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MVK}