IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.25776 OF 2003 Dt.29.12.2009 Between: Reddy Sangaiah … Petitioner And Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Rep. by its Commissioner, Hyderabad and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.25776 OF 2002 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings dt.15.11.2003 of the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (presently, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation). Heard Sri Sudeep Reddy representing Sri K. Raghuveer Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation for the respondents. The petitioner, who intended to construct a building with ground plus one floor, submitted his application dt.9.1.2002 for permission to construct over an extent of 306 sq. yards. The said application was rejected by proceedings dt.15.11.2003 on the ground that the sale deed accompanying the application filed by the petitioner showed an extent of 184 sq. yards only. The material on record shows that when the petitioner’s application was earlier rejected, he resubmitted the same through his letter dt.13.8.2002 wherein he informed that while the sale deed had shown lesser extent of land, the judgment and decree dt.21.3.2002, in O.S.No.212 of 1995 on the file of the I Additional Rent Controller, City Small Causes Court -cum- XIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, declared the petitioner’s right over the balance extent of 120 sq. yards, which is not included in the sale deed. However, by the impugned order, respondent No.1 rejected the said application. While doing so, respondent No.1 has not referred to the petitioner’s representation dt.13.8.2002 and the judgment and decree of the Civil Court referred to above. If the petitioner’s right over the balance extent of 120 sq. yards, over the above extent shown in the sale deed, has been declared as contended by the petitioner, his application for building permission cannot be refused merely on account of the fact that the sale deed has not shown the entire extent of 306 sq. yards. In all fairness, respondent No.1 ought to have considered the petitioner’s representation and granted permission, if his contention that for the balance extent of the land, which is not covered by the sale deed, his right was declared by the competent Civil Court. The Writ Petition is, therefore, allowed with the direction to respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner’s representation. If it is found that the petitioner’s right over the balance extent of land not covered by the sale deed has been declared by the Court of the I Additional Rent Controller, City Small Causes Court -cum- XIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S.No.212 of 1995, respondent No.1 shall grant building permission over the extent of 306 sq. yards subject to the petitioner complying with other statutory requirements. Respondent No.1 shall take a decision in this regard within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P. No.32535 of 2003, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 29.12.2009 bnr