THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.7695 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring allotment of stray piece of land admeasuring 98 square yards in category-II in Survey No.201, Ward No.5, Block-6, situated at Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, R.R. District as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and the provisions of HUDA Act, 1975 and rules there under and being without proper layout approval and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to allot the same to the petitioner as per G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 11-06-1984 and G.O.Ms.No.1183, dated 09-11-1981 requiring proper publicity and not to alter the nature of the property and not to alienate the same. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the 1st respondent allotted an extent of Ac.367.00 at Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar Mandal, R.R. District on 08-06-1976 to the 2nd respondent for developing and disposing of the said land. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent made layout of the entire land and obtained approved layout from the 1st respondent and allotted and registered the same to different persons. The petitioner was allotted Plot No.77 showing as layout plot and registered in the name of Smt.Kalawathi through registered sale deed, dated 30-12-1997. It is further stated that to the left side of his plot No.77, Municipal House No.6-5-162/T2/77, in Category Type-II in phase-V, S.F.C. of Vanasthalipuram, Residential complex in Survey No.201, admeasuring 131.56 square yards, there is open space of about 70 square yards which is actually available on ground belonging to the 2nd respondent and he requested to allot and sell the stray piece of land as per G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 11-06-1984. He also made representation, dated 18-02-2003, but so far no response was received. It is further stated that 5th respondent is digging a bore well and making preparation for construction in the said piece of land, who claims to have got the property from his sister (4th respondent) through a gift settlement deed, dated 11-05-2007 and 4th respondent got the property from 3rd respondent. The allotment of plot No.78-A is not in the original layout plan. There is no proper approval for the said allotment. The plot holders in the scheme are deprived of their entitlement under law. His representation deserves to be considered and disposed of and till then the construction activity in the stray piece of land adjacent to plot No.78-A has to be interdicted. 3. The 2nd respondent filed counter-affidavit stating that the land in question was allotted to the 3rd respondent as per rules and regulations in the year 1996 only and therefore, question of allotment of that land to the petitioner does not arise. 4. The 5th respondent filed separate counter-affidavit stating that by virtue of gift settlement deed, he got the property from the 4th respondent, who in turn purchased the said site from the original allotee and hence, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 5. As seen from the pleadings, it is clear that the subject site ad- measuring 98 square yards in category-II in Survey No.201, Ward No.5, Block-6 situated in Sahebnagar Kalan village, Hayathnagar, R.R. District was allotted to the 3rd respondent on payment of market value. In pursuance of the said allotment, the 2nd respondent executed a sale deed, dated 02-04-1996 in favour of the 3rd respondent. A specific plea has been taken by the 2nd respondent that in terms of the rules and regulations, the allotment was made to the 3rd respondent. That fact has not been denied or disputed in the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner. The question of allotment cannot be challenged for the reason that a regular sale deed has already been executed by the 2nd respondent in favour of the 3rd respondent. When the land is not available with the 2nd respondent, the question of allotting the same to the petitioner being the owner of the side plot by sale of the subject site cannot be made in view of the fact that the 2nd respondent is not a owner at present as he already sold that land by way of registered sale deed for valuable consideration. There is no factual aspects pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition as to how the allotment of subject land has to be illegal and arbitrary. In the absence of any factual foundation, the allotment cannot be cancelled as in pursuance of said allotment, a regular sale deed was executed by the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 14-11-2011 Hsd