THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO :11420 OF 2002 DATED 19-01-2010 Between: M.V.Panjanathan & 2 others. … PETITIONERS And The Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rasoolpura, Secunderabad & 2 others. ... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring that the petitioners are entitled for release of the final layout in respect of their land in an extent of Ac.2.33 guntas in Sy.No.606 and 608/1 of Kandiguda, hamlet of Kapra village, Rangareddy District for which a draft lay out was already sanctioned in file No.666/MP2/HUDA/93, dated 26-09-1994, and also consequently declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the layout in file No.666/MP2/HUDA/93, dated 26-09-1994, in spite of binding decisions in W.P.No.19907 of 1997, dated 09-11-1999 and W.A.No.353 of 2000, dated 19-04-2000, as arbitrary and illegal. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the respondents. 3. It appears, petitioner filed an application before the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority seeking permission for development of the land in Sy.No.606 and 608/1 of Kandiguda village on 18-01-1993. The said application was considered and disposed of stating that final lay out plan approval will be considered only after compliance of the conditions enclosed to appendix-I of the draft lay out and after handing over the public open space earmarked in the draft layout plan, to the local authority, through a gift deed, and thereafter intimating in writing to them within the stipulated time period of one year i.e., 26-09-1994. However, the above approval shall be deemed to have lapsed, in the event of non-compliance of the conditions, and the draft layout approval automatically stands cancelled. 4. According to the petitioner, the Urban Land Ceiling proceedings relating to the very same land were pending with the Urban Land Ceiling Authority, though a draft approval was made on 27-09-1993, till the disposal of W.A.No.353 of 2000 on 19-04- 2000 by this Court and the possession of the said land was delivered to the petitioner, ultimately, after attainment of finality of litigation only on 04-03-2003. Under those circumstances, the question of developing or complying with the conditions imposed in the order dated 27-09-1993, does not arise. Now, the authorities say that the draft approval made on 27-09-1993 automatically stands cancelled in view of the fact that the conditions were not complied with within one year as stipulated therein. 5. From the above facts it is clear that there was a litigation against this very same land under the Urban Land Ceiling Act before various authorities and before this Court and that attained finality only on 19-04-2000 and the petitioner was put in possession of the property on 04-03-2003. Therefore it is not proper for the respondent authorities to say that the order passed on 27-09-1993 cannot be given effect to since the conditions were not followed within the stipulated time. 6. Under those circumstances, petitioner is directed to file an appropriate application explaining these facts before the 1st respondent, and on filing such application the 1st respondent shall examine the draft approval of the layout, dated 27-09-1993, in respect of the land in Sy.No.606 and 608/1 admeasuring Ac.2.33 guntas and also examine as to the judgment of this Court in W.A.No.353 of 2000, dated 19-04-2000, and the fact that the possession was delivered to the petitioner on 04-03-2003 for the purpose of final approval of the layout submitted by the petitioner and shall pass appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of the application from the petitioner and communicate the same to the petitioner. It is needless to mention that the respondent authorities shall also consider the application under Section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act. 7. Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ C.V.RAMULU,J 19th January, 2010. Tsy