HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8982 of 2004 Order: The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in issuing notification dated 24-04-2004, thereby, converting open land of an extent of Ac.2.39 guntas situated between road Nos.2 and 3 in Phases I & II at Kukatpally Housing Board Colony, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy district, into residential/commercial complexes as illegal and arbitrary and a consequential direction to the respondents to retain the said land as open land as per the original plan layout sanctioned in the year 1979. 2. The Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, a statutory body under the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1956, had acquired land of an extent of Ac.222 guntas situated at Kukatpally village in Ranga Reddy district for the purpose of developing the same into residential layouts. It is stated that initially a layout was obtained in the year 1979 showing an extent of Ac.26.62 guntas of land as green-belt area (open space) and an extent of Ac.11.04 guntas of land towards commercial space. The Housing Board issued notification dated 24-04-2004 in the newspapers by which it had invited expression of interest from reputed developers/developer firms for developing commercial/residential complexes in an extent of Ac.12.00 guntas of land at Kukatpally Housing Board Colony. This writ petition is concerned only with an extent of Ac.2.39 guntas situated between road Nos.2 and 3, which was initially stated to have been shown as green-belt area. 3. This writ petition is filed questioning the impugned notification mainly on the ground that when the said area of Ac.2.39 guntas is shown as green-belt area in the layout which was obtained in the year 1979, no constructions are permissible therein; as such the impugned notification issued by the second respondent, inviting expression of interest for developing residential and commercial complexes in an extent of Ac.12.00 guntas, including the subject area of Ac.2.39 guntas, is illegal. 4. The fourth respondent, Executive Engineer (HG), North Division, A.P. Housing Board, has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents stating that though the initial layout was obtained in the year 1979, the Housing Board obtained a revised layout of integrated housing scheme at Kukatpally and the same was released by the Housing Board by permit No.2103/MP2/H/94 on 01-05-1995. It is stated that the places which are earmarked for parks and playgrounds are delineated in green colour in the plan and the land now where the Housing Board proposes to take up developmental work is actually earmarked for commercial purpose as per the revised layout. 5. In view of the aforesaid averments made by the respondents in the counter affidavit, the only question that arises for consideration is whether the impugned notification issued by the respondents is illegal, on the allegation of the petitioner that no construction activity can be taken up in the land in question. While it is true that that as per the initial layout obtained in the year 1979 the land in question was shown as green-belt area, but when application was made for revising the layout of integrated housing scheme at Kukatpally, the same was granted vide permit No.2103/MP2/H/94 on 01-05-1995 and as per the revised layout, the area of Ac.2.39 guntas is earmarked for commercial purpose. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that no construction is permitted on the land in question, so as to invalidate the notification issued by the respondents inviting expression of interest. As no other ground arises for consideration, I do not find any illegality in the impugned notification. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the revised layout, it would be at liberty to question the same. No costs. ___________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. June 11, 2009 MRR