IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14782 of 2008 Between: 1 P. Indira D/o. Late P. Sriramulu R/o. H.No.10-2-409, Plot No.221, Street No.2, West Marredpally, Secunderabad - 500026. 2 P. Jayalakshmi D/o. Late P. Sriramulu R/o. H.No.10-2-409, Plot No.221, Street No.2, West Marredpally, Secunderabad - 500026. 3 M. Meenakshi Naidu S/o. Late M. Venkatappa R/o. H.No.3-15-D, LIC Colony, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 4 P. Vijayalakshmi Manoharam W/o. Late P. Umamaheshwar Rao R/o. H.No.3/1, Engineering College Road, Anantapur- 515002, Anantapur District. 5 A.G. Venugopal Reddy S/o. A.G.Rajasekhar Reddy R/o. H.No.2-63, Krishna Reddy Colony, Opp: J.N.T.U. Engineering College Gate, Anantapur-515002, Anantapur District. 6 Sowmya Karanth W/o. Balachandra Karanth R/o. Flat No.103, 14/186/4, Anant Sai Residency, Kamal Nagar, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 7 Dr. M. Madhavi W/o. Dr. J. Bhanu Kiran R/o. Madhavi Kiran Bhawan, Near T.V. Tower, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 8 Y. Padmanabha Reddy S/o. Late Gangi Reddy R/o. Plot No.2, L.I.C. Colony, Engineering College Road, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 9 A.G. Anuradha Reddy W/o. A.G. Venugopal Reddy R/o. H.No.2-63, Krishna Reddy Colony, Opp. J.N.T.U. Engineering College Gate, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 10 M. Kalyan Kumar S/o. M. Ramakrishnaiah R/o. H.No.19/28, Tilak Road, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. 11 M. Indira W/o. M. Kalyan Kumar R/o. H.No.19/28, Tilak Road, Anantapur - 515002, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Town & Country Planning, A.C. Guards, Hyderabad. 3 The Municipal Corporation of Anantapur, rep. by the Commissioner (F.A.C.) Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4 The Anantapur Rural Panchayat rep. by the Secretary and Executive Officer, Engineering College Road, Anantapur 515002, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in submitting proposals to revise the approved Master Plan of Anantapur vide G.O.Ms.No.1122/MA, dated 13.10.1981 including the change of alignment of 100 feet wide road connecting from Engineering College Road to Anantapur-Bangalore Road vide letter RC No.4134/2001/G1 dated 02.05.2008 to the 1st respondent / Government through the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, illegal, violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Urban Area Development Act, 1975 and A.P. Town Planning Act of 1920 and rules made therein and consequently direct the respondents not to change or modify the alignment of 100 feet road passing through Sy.No.437/P of Anantapur Town. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.G.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled by the petitioners, who are 11 in number, assailing the action of the Municipal Corporation of Anantapur-3rd respondent in submitting the proposal to revise the approved master plan of Anantapur vide G.O.Ms.No.1122 M.A., dated 13.10.1981, including the change of alignment of 100 feet wide road connecting from Engineering College Road to Ananthapur-Bangalore Road vide letter Rc.No.4143/2001, GI, dated 02.05.2008 to the Director of Town and Country Planning, Hyderabad-2nd respondent. 2. The petitioners are owners of various extents of house plots in Survey No.433/2. They purchased the house plots in the lay out plan L.P.No.25/1995. The 4th petitioner is the original owner of an extent of Ac.6.61 cents comprising Survey No.433/2 situated at Anantapur Rural Panchayat. She applied for sanction of lay out plan on plotting the land and dividing the land into plots falling under the Gram Panchayat. After paying requisite lay out fee, she submitted necessary plan to the Anantapur Rural Panchayat-4th respondent. The 4th respondent in turn sent the plan to the Director of Town and Country Planning, Hyderabad-2nd respondent for grant of permission. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent vide Lr.D.Dis. No.11258/1994/A1, dated 25.03.1995, accorded permission subject to the conditions stipulated therein. On the northern side of the petitioners’ plots, there is Survey No.437/P (Part), which is a vacant land. The owner of Survey No.437/P obtained lay out plan to his land to an extent of about Ac.8.00 cents from the concerned authorities vide lay out No.8/1986. In the said lay out almost all the plot owners constructed pucca residential houses. Adjacent to the said Survey No.437/P towards east, the owners of Survey No.436/P have also obtained lay out plan vide L.P.No.225/1988 from the then Municipal Authorities of Anantapur and sold plots to various persons and the plot owners also constructed residential houses in their respective plots. The Anantapur Municipality sent proposal for development of urban areas of Anantapur Municipal Area along with neighbouring Gram Panchayats and prepared a General Town Planning (G.T.P.) Scheme under the provisions of A.P. Town Planning Act, 1920 (for short, ‘the Act’) and submitted the same to the Government of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Hyderabad-1st respondent, for granting of permission. The 1st respondent accorded permission of the said scheme under the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder vide G.O.Ms.No.1122 M.A., dated 13.10.1981. The same was published in A.P.Gazette under the provisions of the Act. The Anantapur Municipality has been upgraded as Corporation in September, 2005 and a notiﬁcation came to be issued to that eﬀect. The 3rd respondent made a proposal to modify the earlier G.T.P. Scheme, dated 13.10.1981, to develop the Urban Areas of Anantapur Municipal Corporation by including some more gram panchayats. The 3rd respondent Corporation made a proposal to change the alignment of 100 feet road shown in the G,O.Ms.No.1122 M.A., dated 13.10.1981 which is passing through Survey No.437/P. The authorities indicated shifting of the alignment of 100 feet wide road towards south whereby the plots owned by the petitioners are affected. The petitioners ﬁled their objections for the proposal sent by the Ananthapur Municipal Corporation. Since their objections remain unattended, the petitioners approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 10.07.2008. 2nd respondent ﬁled counter-aﬃdavit. V.R.Satish Chandra, Director of Town and Country Planning, Govt. of A.P., Hyderabad, has sworn to the counter-aﬃdavit. It is stated in the counter-aﬃdavit that the objections of the petitioners along with other objections, if any, after issuance of Form No.2 notice will be considered before approving the proposal sent by the Anantapur Municipal Corporation. For better appreciation, I may refer para.2 of the counter-aﬃdavit and it reads as hereunder: “It is submitted that as per Section 8 of A.P.Town Planning Act, 1920 it is obligation on the part of the municipal council to prepare the general town planning scheme and publish and submit the same for the sanction of the Government and the Government will consider for sanction before the date ﬁxed by them by issuing a notification. As per Rule 27 of the rules framed under the Act. ‘A draft general town planning scheme prepared by the Municipal Council shall be published on the notice board of the municipal office as a notification in Form No.1.’ Thereafter, under Rule 28 of the said Rules, ‘A notice in Form No.2 shall also be published on the notice board of the oﬃce of every local authority within whose limits any portion of the area proposed to be included in the scheme is situated and the said draft notiﬁcation will be published in one or more newspapers circulated in the District.” On receipt of the objections from the general public including the petitioners the same will be considered by the respondents herein. Even before reaching the said stage, the petitioners approached this Hon’ble Court and ﬁled the present writ petition. Therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.” 4. When the writ petition came up for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent Corporation. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that there is every likelihood of the proposal sent by the 3rd respondent Corporation being accepted and in which event, the plots owned by the petitioners will be affected. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the objections of the petitioners will be considered after issuance of Form No.2 Notice as provided in Rule 28 of the Rules and since that stage has not yet come, the apprehension of the petitioners that their objections will not be considered is not based on sound reasons. 8. Rule 28 of the Town Planning Rules, 1933 (for short, ‘the Rules’) reads as hereunder: “28. A notice in Form No.2 shall also be published. (i) on the notice board of the oﬃce of every local authority within whose limits any portion of the area proposed to be included in the scheme is situated; (ii) in the Fort St.George Gazette in case the whole or any portion of the area proposed to be included in the scheme is situated in the City of Madras and in the District Gazette concerned in case the whole or any portion of such area is situated in any district outside the City of Madras; and (iii) in one or more newspapers circulating in the district or districts in which such area is situated.” 9. The 2nd respondent has categorically stated in the counter- aﬃdavit that the objections of the petitioners will be considered after issuance of Form No.2 Notice. Since Form No.2 notice yet to be published, there is no reason in the apprehension of the petitioners that their objections will not be considered. 10. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage directing the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioners before the proposal sent by the 3rd respondent Corporation is accepted. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:15th September, 2008. cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}