IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.253 of 2007 Between: 1 Bade Kondanda Rao, S/o.Late Daniahy, R/o.7-195, Swarna Maruthinagar, Rishikonda Village, Gitam College Post, Visakhapatnam-45. 2 Vasipalli Satyanarayana, S/o.Late Rama Swamy, R/o.8-178, Swarna Maruthinagar, Rishikonda Village, Gitam College Post, Visakhapatnam-45. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Govt. Of Andhara Pradesh rep. By its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admimistration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 Visakhapatnam Urban Developement Authority(VUDA), Siripuram Jn.Visakhapatnam rep.by its Vice-Chairman. 3 District Collector, Visakhapatnam District,Visakhapatnam. 4 M/s. Radiant Developers Pvt.Ltd, Flat No.713, Swapnalok Complex 92/93, Sarojinidevi Road, Secunderabad rep.by its Director. .....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 or direction more particulary one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in developing the land and disposing oﬀ the developed house sites in Tarakaramma Satellite Township Area (Rushikonda) layout Madhuravada village, Visakhapatnam without taking steps to implement G.O.Ms.No.913 as unconstitutional, illegal, and consquently direct the authorities to set aside 30 acres of land Tarakarama Satellite Township Area (Rushikonda) for the housing for poor while declaring that respondents 1,2 and 3 could not have handed over Ac.2 of land in Sy.No.332 to respondent 4 and pass such order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.S.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.253 of 2007 ORDER: The two petitioners of Rushikonda village ﬁled the present writ petition seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in developing the land and disposing of the developed house sites in Tarakarama Satellite Township Area (Rushikonda) layout Madhuravada village, Visakhapatnam without taking steps to implement G.O.Ms.No.913 M.A. Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (1-2) Department, dated 09.11.1987, as unconstitutional and illegal, and consequently direct the authorities to set aside 30 acres of land in Tarakarama Satellite Township Area (Rushikonda) for the housing for poor, while declaring that respondents 1, 2 and 3 could not have handed over 2 acres of land in Sy.No.332 to the 4th respondent. It is stated that as per Clause-10 of the G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987, in each of the township, speciﬁc area shall be set apart for housing to Economically Weaker Sections which may constitute about 15% of the population of the township, and the families belonging to Economically Weaker Sections of the township may be accommodated in residential ﬂats with ground plus 3 upper ﬂoors to be constructed according to prescribed norms by Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority or Director of Weaker Section Housing. It is stated that while approving the layouts, no land was set apart or earmarked for Economically Weaker Sections and therefore, the Economically Weaker Sections could not have secured or unable to secure any residential ﬂats. It is stated that it is the duty of the respondents to implement the conditions of the aforesaid G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987. The 2nd respondent-Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority ﬁled counter, stating that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987 is not in force and the same has been withdrawn by the Government, vide orders in G.O.Ms.No.228, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (H2) Department, dated 13.03.2008, and therefore, nothing survives in this writ petition. In so far as the allegations made with regard to handing over Ac.2.00 of land in Sy.No.332 of Madhurawada village to the 4 th respondent is concerned, it is stated that the said Ac.2.00 of land was not at all handed over to the 4th respondent. The land of Ac.50.00, handed over to the 4th respondent, comprises of Sy.No.336/P, but not in Sy.No.332 of Madhurawada village. It is further stated that so far Ac.166.48 cents have been allotted to the housing for Economically Weaker Sections in Madhurawada village, which constitutes 21% of the total approved layout areas of an extent of Ac.796.73 cents. It is stated that the conditions stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987 have been followed and there was no violation of Clause-10 of the said G.O. Sri K.S.Murthy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that no doubt G.O.Ms.Nos.911, 912 and 913 dated 09.11.1987 have been withdrawn by G.O.Ms.No.228, dated 13.03.2008 subject to the following guidelines: 1. The guidelines issued in the Master Plan and Zoning Regulations should be followed. 2. C.R.Z.Rules shall be kept in view while giving permission to Townships. 3. Shall take all steps to preserve and protect the environmentally sensitive areas. 4. Any such other conditions as may be speciﬁed from time to time by the Government. But it is stated that as long as G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987 was in force and the layout plans have been sanctioned, the Clause-10 of the said G.O. shall be implemented by the respondents. It is further stated that the petitioners are unable to point out in any of the layouts with regard to non- implementation of Clause-10 of the said G.O.Ms.No.913. It is further stated that except making certain allegations against the 4th respondent with regard to not earmarking about 15% of the population of the township for allotment of ﬂats to the Economically Weaker Sections, the petitioners have not taken any steps to impled the third parties in whose favour layouts have been made, as parties to the writ petition. It is further stated that in fact, W.P.Nos.1381/2005, 18670/2007 and 1090/2008 which are ﬁled for implementation of G.O.Ms.No.913, dated 09.11.1987 have been dismissed by orders dated 07.07.2008, 26.06.2008 and 08.07.2008 respectively. One of the orders in said three writ petitions i.e. in W.P.18670/2007, passed by the Division Bench of this Court, dated 26.06.2008, is extracted hereunder for the sake of convenience: “This public interest litigation was based on G.O.Ms.No.911, M.A. & U.D.(I2) Department, dated 09.11.1987. The case of the petitioners was that in view of the afore-stated G.O. certain lands could not have been sold by the Government or its agencies. During the course of hearing, the learned Advocate-General has submitted that the afore-stated G.O.Ms.No.911, dated 9th November 1987 has been now withdrawn by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.228, M.A. & U.D.(H2) Department, dated 13th March 2008. The afore-stated fact could not be disputed by the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners. A copy of G.O.Ms.No.228, dated 13th March 2008, whereby G.O.Ms.No.911, 912 and 913, dated 09th November 1987, have been withdrawn, has been placed on record. In pursuance of the undisputed fact, in our opinion, this petition would not survive. The petition stands disposed of as rejected. Interim relief granted earlier, stands vacated.” In view of the aforesaid orders of the Division Bench of this Court and in view of the fact that G.O.Ms.No.913 has been withdrawn by orders of the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.228, dated 13.03.2008, subject to the aforesaid guidelines, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to question the action of the respondents in not following the guidelines issued in the Master plan and Zoning Regulations. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 19.09.2008 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Govt. Of Andhara Pradesh rep. By its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admimistration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 Visakhapatnam Urban Developement Authority(VUDA), Siripuram Jn.Visakhapatnam rep.by its Vice-Chairman. 3 District Collector, Visakhapatnam District,Visakhapatnam. 4 2. 2CCs to 5. 2CD copies