THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No. 18852 OF 2010 ORDER: Heard Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Kalpana Ekbote, learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation. With their consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. This writ petition is directed against an order passed on 8.6.2009 by the Deputy Commissioner, Kukatpally, Circle 14 of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (for short `GHMC’) rejecting the building application form submitted by the writ petitioner. Two reasons have been assigned for such rejection. (1) the site under reference, upon inspection by the corporation officials, it was noticed that since the sub division of plot No.7 has not been incorporated in the approved layout of the Housing Board, no such building permission can be accorded over any site situated in a layout. (2) There is a dispute about the usage of the land with regard to which a court case is pending. It is not in dispute that the court case ultimately ended in upholding the right of the Housing Board to use the land in question. Insofar as the 1st issue is concerned, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (for short `HUDA’), the competent Urban Development Authority as early as on 28.9.2005, has informed the Executive Engineer/Housing, North Division, Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, Bharath Nagar, Hyderabad, that his application for approval of plot sub- division has been considered by Hyderabad Urban Development Authority and it was approved. It was also noticed that the approved layout sub-division of plot No.7 has also been forwarded to the Commissioner, Kukatpally Municipality on the same day through Letter No. 7955/P7/sd/Plg/H/04, dated 28.9.2005 of the HUDA. Obviously, this approval accorded by the HUDA has missed the attention of the Deputy Commissioner while rejecting the application submitted by the writ petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition deserves to be allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The respondent is directed to re-consider the application of the writ petitioner for according building permission, duly taking into account the fact that the competent Urban Development Authority has already accorded approval and permission for sub-division of the composite Plot No.7 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time the respondent grants the necessary building permission, the petitioner shall not commence construction of the building. The writ petition is allowed. No costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J Knk 8th September 2010