IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION Nos.2407, 2369, 2373, 2374, 2375, 2376, 2379, 2380, 2381, 2385, 2438, 2655, 2417 and 2670 of 2001 WRIT PETITION NO : 2407 of 2001 Between: B.S.Ramanadhan Rao, S/o Subramanyam, R/o H.No.A-61/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyd. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co.Op.House Bldgs Society Ltd., C/o APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyd. .....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 call for the records relating the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.22-1-01 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropraite Writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.T.NIRANJAN REDDY Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK} WRIT PETITION NO : 2369 of 2001 Between: P.Venkateswarulu S/o.Kotyaiah R/o.H.No.A-64/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA Secunderabad. 2 HUDA Rep.by its Secretary Secunderabad. 3 Secretary Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op.House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO'S Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderbad. (Regd.No.TAB-116). .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.T.NIRANJAN REDDY Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2373 of 2001 Between: A.Pullaiah S/o.Appaiah R/o.H.No.A-56/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op.House Buildings Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. (Regd.No.TAB-116) .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.22.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2374 of 2001 Between: R.Rajaiah, S/o Yellaiah, R/o H.No.A-58/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyd. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees C-op. Housing Building Society Ltd., C/o APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyd. .....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 call for the records relating the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.22-1-01 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropraite Writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK} WRIT PETITION NO : 2375 of 2001 Between: Smt.Ameena Bee W/o.Shaik Hussain Saheb, R/o.H.No.A-57/EWS, Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA Secunderabad. 2 HUDA Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op. House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderbad. (Regd.No.TAB-116) .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.22.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2376 of 2001 Between: Mohd.Ali S/o.Ahmed Ali R/o.H.No.A-59/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op. House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. (Regd.No.TAB-116) .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2379 of 2001 Between: G.R.Parvathi W/o.Late Bhujanga Rao, R/o.H.No.A-19/EWSH, Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op. House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.22.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2380 of 2001 Between: Mohd.Naseer S/o.Mohd.Ibrahim R/o.H.No.A-60/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op. House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2381 of 2001 Between: P.Nirmala W/o.P.Tirupathi Rao, R/o.H.No.A-65/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op. House Building Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. (Regd.No.TAB-116). .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2385 of 2001 Between: G.Satyanarayana S/o.G.Ramdas R/o.H.No.A-1472/LIG Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep.by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-Op.Housing Society Ltd., C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. (Regd.No.TAB-116) .....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 call for the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23.1.2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropriate writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.T.NIRANJAN REDDY Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} WRIT PETITION NO : 2438 of 2001 Between: K.Vinayaka Rao S/o.Rama Rao R/o.H.No.A-62, Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA Secunderabad. 2 HUDA Rept. by its Seceretary Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co.op. House Building Society Ltd., (Regd.No.TAB-116) C/o.APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. .....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 call fot the records relating to the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23-1-2001 of the 1st Respondent and quash the same by issuing appropriate Writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of Certiorari and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN} WRIT PETITION NO : 2655 of 2001 Between: K.Jaya Ram, S/o K.Lingaiah, R/o S-4C-598, NGO's Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Estate Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Secunderabad. 2 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rep by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, rep by its Vice Chairman, Hyderabad. 4 The Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., C/o AP NGO's Home 'Chaitanya', Gunfoundry, Hyd. .....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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice of the 1st Respondent vide Lr.No.2366/VRC/EMU/HUDA/93 dt.23-1-01, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and one without jurisdiction, hence bad in Law and to consequently set aside the same, and to grant. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.M.RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK} WRIT PETITION NO : 2417 of 2001 Between: Smt.Pravina, W/o Papalal, R/o H.no. A-63/EWS Phase-III, Vanasthalipuram, Hyd. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Estate Officer, HUDA, Secunderabad. 2 HUDA, Rep by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co.Op.House Bldgs Society Ltd., C/o APNGO's Home, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. .....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 call for the records relating the Ltr.2366/VRC/PH- III/EMU/HUDA/93, dt.23-1-01 of the 1st Respondent and quash same by issuing appropraite Writ, orders or direction more particularly in the nature of certiorari and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK} WRIT PETITION NO : 2670 of 2001 Between: B.Nageswara Rao S/o B.Venkoji, R/o H.No.B-572, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Estate Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Secunderabad. 2 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rep by its Secretary, Secunderabad. 3 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rep by its Vice Chairman, Hyderabad. 4 The Secretary, Hyderabad City Employees Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., C/o AP, N.G.O'S Home 'Chaitanya', Gunfoundry, Hyd. .....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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned notice of the 1st Respondent vide Lr.No.2366/VRC/EMU/HUDA/93 dt.23-1-01, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and one without jurisdiction, hence bad in Law and to consequently set aside the same, and to grant Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.M.RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION Nos.2407, 2369, 2373, 2374, 2375, 2376, 2379, 2380, 2381, 2385, 2438, 2655, 2417 and 2670 of 2001 COMMON ORDER: As common questions of facts and law are involved in all these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the members of the 3rd respondent-Hyderabad City Employees Cooperative House Building Society and they have been allotted particular category of houses in their favour, and while so, the 1st respondent-Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (herein after referred to as ‘HUDA’) issued individual notices dated 22nd and 23rd January, 2001 informing the petitioners that they have encroached upon certain land and therefore the amount specified therein towards cost of the encroachment at the rate of Rs.1200/- per square metre has to be paid, failing which the unauthorized structures will be removed. Questioning the similar notices issued in similar letter No.2366/VRC/Ph-III/EMU/HUDA/93, dated 22nd and 23rd January, 2001, all these writ petitions have been filed. 3. As the facts are similar, the brief facts in W.P.2407/2001 are narrated as follows: The petitioner is one of the members of the 3rd respondent society and the members of the 3rd respondent society are the employees of all Directorates, Education and Medical Institutions, Quasi Government Bodies, undertakings of the State Government who are working in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The total membership of the society is 3,389 and the society was registered in the year 1976. It is stated that there is another society viz., the A.P.Secretariat Employees Cooperative House Building Society for the similar purpose for allotment of houses to its members. 4. It is stated that 2,550 members have applied for allotment of houses at Vanasthalipuram, and the Government of Andhra Pradesh by G.O.Ms.No.508 M.A, dated 12.04.1979 and G.O.Ms.No.616, Revenue (Q) Department, dated 25.04.1979 assigned 97 acres of land in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar, Vanastalipuram village. The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority was entrusted with the work of construction of houses for the members of the 3rd respondent society by the aforesaid G.Os. Four types of houses viz., EWS, LIC, MIG-I, and MIG-2 were constructed by Hyderabad Urban Development Authority and the Society allotted the houses to its members, and the petitioner was allotted EWS A-61. The entire land assigned by the Government was named as Phase-III of Vanasthalipuram N.G.O’s Housing colony. The Government assigned the said land in favour of the Society on payment of market value and thus, the Society became the absolute owner of the said land. 5. It is stated that the Society is in occupation of 97 acres of the land in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram village and there is no excess land or any encroachment of land either by the 3rd respondent Society or by any of its members. It is stated that the open land in between the houses was not at all allotted to any of the members of the Society. However, the petitioners made a request to the Society in the year 1986 for allotment of the open site on payment of cost. Accordingly, the Society allotted small extents of land abutting to their respective houses and in the case of the petitioner herein he was allotted 90 sq.yards of vacant land adjacent to his house on payment of Rs.50/- per sq.yard by order dated 10.04.1990. The 3rd respondent on receipt of the amounts from the petitioners confirmed the allotment of site in favour of the petitioners by order-dated 13.09.1993. After receiving the confirmation letter, the petitioners removed the rocks and bushes by investing huge amounts and constructed compound walls to protect their respective houses. It is stated that the open land adjacent to the petitioners’ houses belong to the Society and therefore, the Society allotted the said land to the petitioners and collected money and also issued “No Due Certificates”. 6. While so, the 1st respondent-Estate Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority issued the impugned notice dated 22.01.2001 stating that the petitioner is in unauthorized occupation of the land adjacent to his house No.A-61 Category-EWS, Phase-III of Vanasthalipuram N.G.O’s Housing Colony and earlier a notice dated 11.02.2000 was issued informing the petitioner to pay the cost of the open land adjacent to the house of the petitioner which was encroached by the petitioner, but the petitioner failed to pay the amount mentioned therein, therefore, the petitioner was once again requested to pay the cost of the land encroached by him on or before 15.02.2000, failing which action will be taken for eviction and removal of unauthorized construction, if any in the encroached area without any further notice. Accordingly, the petitioner was called upon to pay a sum of Rs.85,008/- towards cost of the encroached area at the rate of Rs.1200/- per sq.metre. The said notice has been questioned by the petitioner contending that the so called notice dated 11.02.2000 referred to in the impugned notice dated 22.01.2001 was never communicated to him and he is not encroacher of any adjacent land. The 3rd respondent Society is the owner of the entire land on which the houses of the petitioners are situated at N.G.Os colony, Vanasthalipuram, Phase-III. 7. It is further stated that when a Muslim Association of Vanasthalipuram, Phase-III filed W.P.10067/1985 against the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, questioning the cancellation of allotment for construction of Mosque and Arabic School, the respondent, who is 2nd respondent herein filed counter stating that the A.P.Secretariat Employees Cooperative House Building Society and Hyderabad City Employees Cooperative House Building Society are the absolutes owners of Phase-III of Vanasthalipuram and Hyderabad Urban Development Authority is not having any right, and therefore, it cannot be said that the Hyderabad Urband Development Authority is the owner of the said land, and the 3rd respondent Society is only the absolute owner of the said land. 8. It is further stated that there is no inspection or any survey was conducted. In the absence of the same, the 1st respondent issued the impugned notice alleging that the petitioner encroached upon the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority land and demanding to pay the cost of the encroached land, is illegal and arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. 9. It is further stated that the 3rd respondent Society is the absolute owner of 97 acres, which was assigned by the Government in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram village and the 1st respondent has no right or authority to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same by the petitioners and to issue the impugned notices. 10. The 1st respondent-Hyderabad Urban Development Authority filed counter and additional counter stating that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.557 M.A dated 08.06.1976 directing the Forest land admeasuring 367 acres in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar Forest Block in Hyderabad (East) taluk be reserved for allotment of HUDA for establishment of Township. It is stated that out of 367 acres, the Government of Andhra Pradesh allotted 97 acres in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar in favour of 3rd respondent Society and 70 acres in favour of A.P.Secretariat Employees Cooperative House Building Society Limited vide G.O.Ms.No.508 M.A. dated 12.04.1979 and the task of construction of houses was entrusted to HUDA. HUDA constructed 2,505 houses and the same were handed over to the 3rd respondent Society subject to certain conditions for allotment of houses to its members i.e. fixing the land value @ Rs.2,000/- per acre and each member shall be entitled to 300 sq.yards. 11. It is further stated in the counter that the Society has no right over the land encroached by the petitioners and therefore, the HUDA is entitled to collect the cost of the encroached land. With regard to non- service of the earlier notice dated 11.02.2000 referred to in the impugned notice dated 22/23.01.2001 is denied. With regard to admission made by the HUDA in the counter filed in the present writ petition is concerned, it is stated that the vacant land vests with HUDA alone, and the Society cannot claim the right and ownership in the vacant land as per the clarification letter issued by the Government vide letter No.172/I(1)/86-4 M.A dated 02.04.1988. Prior to the said clarification, a counter was filed in the present writ petition stating that the 3rd respondent is the owner of the entire land. 12. It is further stated that pursuant to the representation dated 05.06.2002 made by the Secretariat Employees House Building Society to the Vice Chairman, HUDA requesting to issue “No Objection Certificates”, there was correspondence between the Government and the HUDA and the Government called for a report from the Collector with regard to encroachment of the land of about 16 acres by the 3rd respondent society and the similar “No Objection Certificates” were also requested to be issued by the N.G.Os Colony Residents Welfare Association, and to find out the extent of encroachment area over and above the 97 acres allotted to the 3rd respondent Society, a joint meeting was convened to conduct enquiry and survey and the final meeting was held on 28.06.2007 and the minutes of the meeting were yet to be communicated. 13. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that as per the Orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.508 M.A, (Housing, Municipal Administration & Urban Development-I(1) Department) dated 12.04.1979, 97 acres of land in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram village was allotted in favour of the 3rd respondent Society and the project relating to construction of houses was entrusted to HUDA so as to enable the 3rd respondent Society to allot houses to its members by obtaining loan from HUDA. It is stated that HUDA only invested the amount towards the loan for construction of houses, but it has no right, title or ownership over the said land. It is further stated that as per the Orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.616 (Revenue (Q) Department), dated 25.04.1979, the Society was required to pay Rs.2,000/- per acre towards land cost and also imposed certain stipulations such as each member shall be entitled for allotment of 300 sq.yards and such member shall not own a house in the twin cities and such plot shall not be alienated for a period of 15 years. It is further stated that as the amount stipulated in the said G.Os was already paid by the 3rd respondent Society, the 3rd respondent Society became the absolute owner of 97 acres of land. 14. It is stated that in fact when there was an attempt to demolish the compound wall belonging to similarly situated persons, bearing House Nos.C-337 and C-338, Phase-III of Vanastalipuram, Hyderabad, the said allottees, viz.Smt.G.Kasturi and B.Satyanarayana filed W.P.No.35292/1997, which was allowed by this Court on 24.10.2002 holding that the adjacent vacant land occupied by the said allottees belongs to 3rd respondent Society, but not belongs to HUDA and HUDA is only entrusted with construction of houses to the members of the Society and the members were already paid the value of the vacant land which in turn the Society paid the same to the Government, and therefore, the right in the land vests with the Society, but not vests with the HUDA and the Society is the absolute owner of the land in Phase- III. 15. It is further noticed that with regard to vacant land occupied by the petitioners, the Society already collected amounts from the members and the dispute if any arises with regard to such encroachment, it is in between the Society and its members only, and HUDA is nothing to do with the said disputes. It is further noticed that in the counter filed by HUDA in WP.10067 of 1985, it was admitted that the disputed land herein belong to 3rd respondent society and this Court in the said writ petition held that HUDA is only an agent and it cannot act on its own to deal with the land belonging to the Society. 16. The learned counsel appearing for HUDA submits that HUDA has no claim over 97 acres of land in Sy.No.201 of Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram village, allotted in favour of 3rd respondent Society, but it is stated that with regard to dispute relating to encroachment of the land over and above 97 acres, a meeting was convened on 28.06.2007 in the chambers of the Special Commissioner, Officer of the Chief Commissioner of Land and Administration to finalise the issue pertaining to the afore said two societies and certain minutes have been recorded to resolve the dispute relating to excess land said to have occupied by the said Societies. 17. Heard on either side and perused the material available on record. 18. I have considered the rival contentions. There is no record to show that HUDA issued any notice dated 11.02.2000 which was referred to in the impugned notices dated 22nd and 23rd January, 2001 issued to the petitioners calling upon them to pay the land cost of the encroached area. 19. It is not known what is the extent of encroached area by the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that all the members of the 3rd respondent Society encroached certain extents of land adjacent to their respective houses and paid certain amounts