THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.13654 of 2006 DATED: 25.06.2010 Between: Sanapala Ramanujulu and others .. Petitioners And Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, and others. .. Respondents ORDER: Petitioners claim to be the owners of the land in R.S.No.9/2 and 9/4, admeasuring Ac.1.57 cents and 0.94 cents respectively, situated at Madhavadhara Village, Visakhapatnam District. It is their grievance that the subject lands are their patta lands and that the 1st respondent- Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam is trying to construct Sulabh Complex in the subject lands and the 2nd respondent is taking steps for development of the lands, and civil disputes are also pending between them and the 3rd respondent, who encroached into portion of their lands. Hence, they filed the present writ petition seeking appropriate directions. The 1st respondent filed a detailed counter-affidavit, wherein it is stated that the lands in question, wherein the proposed construction has been taken up, are situated very close to Ekalavya Colony and the said colony has been inhabited by ‘Uppara’ community people, who are all labourers. It is further stated that the locality is slum, there are no toilets, the locality people are using the road margin of National Highway-5 for defecation and, thus, unhygienic conditions are prevailing in the locality. Therefore, the Corporation, to maintain public health and to avoid public nuisance on National Highway-5, felt it necessary to construct public toilets in the locality. In the process, a voluntary social organization by name SPARC motivated the slum dwellers to pay and use the toilets. The said Organization has not brought to the notice of the Corporation, the civil disputes pending with regard to the subject lands. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that a Land Grabbing Case filed by the petitioners is pending in respect of the subject lands and he produced some photographs before the Court, indicating construction activities in the subject lands and laying roads. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submits that the construction of public toilets is taken up by the Corporation only as a temporary measure to create hygienic conditions in the locality and protect the slum dwellers from contagious diseases. So far as the other developmental activities such as laying roads etc. are concerned, learned Standing Counsel submits that the Corporation is not interested in laying roads and providing other amenities. Since a Land Grabbing Case is said to be pending in respect of the subject lands and considering the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Corporation that the construction of toilets in the subject lands is only a temporary measure for the purpose of creating hygienic conditions in the locality, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition as under: “In the event the petitioners succeed in the Land Grabbing Case filed by them in respect of the subject lands, the 1st respondent- Municipal Corporation is directed to remove the toilets constructed and handover the vacant possession of the subject lands to the petitioners.” The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 25th June, 2010 IBL