IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 5954 of 2001 Between: 1 M.Prasad Singh S/o Late M.Uda Singh H.No.1-1-264, Chikkadepally, Hyd. 2 M.Satyanaryana Singh S/o Late M.Uda Singh H.No.1-1-264, Chikkadapally, Hyd. 3 M.Kishan Singh S/o Late M.Uda Singh H.No.1-1-264, Chikkadpally, Hyd. 4 M.Bhavani Singh S/o Late M.Uda Singh H.No.1-1-264, Chikkadepally, Hyd. 5 M.Durga Singh S/o Late M.Shambu Singh H.No.3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyd. 6 M.Pavan Singh S/o Late M.Shambu Singh H.No.3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyd. 7 M.Amar Singh S/o Late M.Shambu Singh H.No.3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyd. 8 M.Ghansyam Singh S/o Late M.Shambu Singh H.No.3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyd. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Revenue Secretary (Land Acquisition), Govt of A.P., Secretariat, Hyd. 2 The Dist Collector, Hyderabad Dist, Nampally Station Road, Nampally, Hyd. 3 The Commissioner, M.C.H., M.C.Head Office Building, Tankbund Road, Hyd. 4 The City Planner (Development), M.C.H., M.C.Head Office Building, Tankbund Road No.29, Hyd. 5 The Dy.Commissioner, Hyd M.C., Circle No.III, M.C.H. Commericial Buildings, Abids Circle, 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction specially one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents either to initiate Land Acquisition in respect of Ac.1-35 guntas forming part of Sy.No.86,87, 90 and 91 of Baghlingampally, Revenue Village originally in Musheerabad Mandal now in Himayathnagar Revenue Mandal, Hyd Dist that are taken over from the petitioners or to grant compensation as the per provisions of Land Acquisition Act by negotiations. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.ANANTHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 9515 of 2001 Between: 1 M.Prasad Singh, S/o. Late M.Uda Singh, R/o. H.No. 1-1-264, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 2 M.Satyanarayan Singh, S/o. Late M.Uda Singh, R/o. H.No. 1-1-264, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 3 M.Kishan Singh, S/o. Late M.Uda Singh, R/o. H.No. 1-1-264, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 4 M.Bhavani Singh, S/o. Late M.Uda Singh, R/o. H.No. 1-1-264, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 5 M.Durga Singh, S/o. Late M.Shambu Singh, R/o. H.No. 3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. 6 M.Pavan Singh, S/o. Late M.Shambu Singh, R/o. H.No. 3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. 7 M.Amar Singh, S/o. Late M.Shambu Singh, R/o. H.No. 3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. 8 M.Ghanshyam Singh, S/o. Late M.Shambu Singh, R/o. H.No. 3-1-446, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Municipal Administrarion & Urban Development (P), Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Nampally Station Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Municipal Corporation Head Office Building, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 4 The City Planner (Development), Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Municipal Corporation Head Office Building, Tankbund Road, Road No.29, Hyderabad. 5 The Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Circle NoIII, M.C.H., Commercial Buildings, Abids Circle, 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to act according to law in the matter of taking possession of further property of the petitioners in Survey Nos.86, 87 and 89 to 91 situated at Baghlingampally Village, now within Himayathnagar Revenue Mandal, Hyderabad District. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.V.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos.5954 OF 2001 & 9515 OF 2001 COMMON ORDER: Both the writ petitions are filed for the similar relief on the same ground and the parties are one and the same in both the writ petitions and as such, they are disposed of by a common order. The petitioners claim that their predecessor-in-title are the owners of S.Nos.86, 87, 90 and 91 of Baghlingampally Revenue Village admeasuring Ac.4.18 guntas and they are in possession of the aforesaid land and they have also filed declaration of their lands under section 6 of the Urban Lands (Ceiling & Regulation) Act and that the Special Officer and the Competent authority of Urban Land Ceiling as well as the Appellate Authority did not take into consideration the Land Use Certificate in its Master Plan and Zonal Plan, they had filed Writ Petition No.2042 of 1994 which is said to be pending before this Court. The main grievance of the petitioners in the present Writ Petitions is that the respondents are trying to take over the possession of the land of the petitioners for the purpose of widening of the Hussaisagar nala without following the due process of law and without any notice to the petitioners and on the legal notice issued prior to the filing of the writ petitions, the respondents have not responded for the same. Hence, they have approached this Court by filing the present writ petitions. I have heard both the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. Respondents-2 to 4 have filed their counter affidavit wherein it is specifically averred in paragraph 6 as follows: “I further submit that this respondent has proposed to widen the nala basing on the report as accepted by the Expert Committee and only demarcation was made on the ground for the purpose of ascertaining the extent of land required for undertaking the widening of nala as per the said proposal. When this respondent is proposing to widen the nala this respondent will follow strictly the procedure laid down under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act for acquisition of the land depending upon the actual extent of land i.e., required for the purpose. In fact necessary proposals were already sent to the land revenue authorities for examining the proposal and the same is in progress. I submit that as stated above private properties will be utilized for the purpose of widening the nala only after following the procedure in accordance with law. “ In view of the above submission made in the counter affidavit filed by respondents-2 to 4, I am of the opinion that the relief that is sought for in both the writ petitions, does not survive for adjudication. Recording the submission made in the counter affidavit filed by respondents-2 to 4 that the above private properties will be utilized for the purpose of widening the nala, only after following the procedure in accordance with law, both the writ petitions are disposed recording the above averment in the counter-affidavit. Accordingly, Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. ___________________________________ Justice VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 15th December, 2008. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos.5954 OF 2001 & 9515 OF 2001 Dated 15th December, 2008.