IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19066 of 2011 Between: The Visakha Autonagar Small Scale Industries Welfare Association, Visakhapatnam. … Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (APIIC), Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P. Krishna Prakash Counsel for the respondents: Sri P. Roy Reddy This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19066 of 2011 ORDER:- At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. I have heard Sri P. Krishna Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Roy Reddy, learned Standing counsel for APIIC representing the respondents. The petitioner is an association of small scale industrialists. They felt aggrieved by the proposal of the respondents in alienating the green belt area and common facilities area in D Block and D Block (Expansion) of Industrial Park, Autonagar, Visakhapatnam. The petitioners apprehended that by such alienation the respondents will deny the industrialists use of the common area and green belt. A detailed counter aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the General Manager, Asset Management (Law) of respondent No.1, wherein it is inter alia stated that the open spaces/green belts in Block-D and Block-D (Expansion) of the approved layout of the APIIC Industrial Park, Autonagar, Visakhapatnam, will be maintained as per the norms, that the common facilities area, which has been kept apart initially, has lost its relevance and there is no need for the same to be continued as it is, since there is suﬃcient place available elsewhere. It is further averred that the excess open areas in Block-D have been converted into industrial plots by retaining the requisite open areas as per norms, that the revised layout in relation to Block-D was approved by the Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority vide L.P.No.10 of 2010 and that further a revision is now proposed to swap plot No.189 admeasuring 5244.12 square meters with corresponding open area since the said plot is next to the residential colony. It is further averred that shifting of open area to the land now covered by the said industrial plot would be more practical and that this would be done after obtaining appropriate clearance/revision of layout. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that besides the issue of proposed conversion of industrial plots, the petitioners apprehend that after conversion, the respondents may not allot the plots through auction. The learned Standing counsel submitted that the industrial plots, after conversion, will fall in non-auction zone and that the procedure prescribed under the relevant regulations will be followed in allotment of the plots. As regards the ﬁrst mentioned grievance of the petitioners, the counter aﬃdavit has made it very clear that the open spaces/green belts area will be maintained as per the norms and that the only change that is sought to be made is that shifting of these areas to plot No.189 from the present place and utilizing the present place for industrial use. It is further undertaken in the counter aﬃdavit that common facilities area in Block-D (Expansion) would be utilised after getting the layout revised to that extent. In view of this unequivocal stand taken by the respondents to the eﬀect that there will be no change in the open spaces/green belts area except to the extent of their placement, the petitioners cannot have any grievance. With regard to the likely method of allotment, it is premature for this Court to pronounce upon this contention. The process of allotment will be taken up by the respondents only after conversion of the open spaces and green belts area and the layout is revised for this purpose. If the petitioners have any grievance with respect to such allotments thereafter, they shall be free to avail appropriate remedy. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, interim order, dated 08.07.2011, is vacated and WPMP.No.23016 of 2011 is dismissed and WVMP.No.3385 of 2011 is disposed of. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 30.11.2011 ES