IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION Nos.24470 and 24541 of 2008 WRIT PETITION No.24470 of 2008: Between: Smt.K.Madhavi W/o.K.Sreeram Reddy R/o.16-3-1/E/1, Chenchalguda Jail Quarters, Hyderabad - 24. ..... PETITIONER AND The Gram Panchayat, Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary. .....RESPONDENT 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in preventing the petitioner from proceeding with the construction of house in Plot No.101, Sy.No.93, admeasuring 200 sq. yds., situated at Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal, arbitrary and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent: MR.G.ELISHA, SC WRIT PETITION No.24541 of 2008: Between: 1 Smt. Mubarakunnisa Begum W/o. Late Mir Ahmed Ali Khan rep. by General Power of Attorney Sri A. Pandurangam, S/o. Late Veeraiah, age 65 Yrs, Occ: Business, R/o.16-1-506/3, Saidabad, Hyderabad. 2 Sri Mir Mohammed Ali Khan S/o. Late Mir Ahmed Ali Khan rep. by General Power of Attorney A. Pandurangam S/o. Late Veeraiah, age 65 Yrs, Occ: Business, R/o.16-1-506/3, Saidabad, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Nawab Mir Sardar Ali Khan S/o. Late Mir Ahmed Ali Khan rep. by General Power of Attorney A. Pandurangam, S/o. Late Veeraiah, age 65 Yrs, Occ: Business, R/o.16-1-506/3, Saidabad, Hyderabad 4 Sri Nawab Mir Hameed Ali Khan S/o. Late Mir Ahmed Ali Khan rep. by General Power of Attorney A. Pandurangam S/o. Late Veeraiah, age 65 Yrs, Occ: Business, R/o.16-1-506/3, Saidabad, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND The Gram Panchayat, Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, rep. by its Panchayat Secretary. .....RESPONDENT 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 more especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in granting building permissions to various individuals in respect of the land in Sy.No.93, situated at Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, R.R. District, pending disposal of W.P.No.3483 of 2006, as bad, arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the respondent not to grant any building permissions to any body in respect of the land in Sy.No.93, situated at Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, R.R. District, pending disposal of W.P.No.3483 of 2006 in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.H.VENUGOPAL Counsel for the Respondent: MR.G.ELISHA, SC The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Both these writ petitions are interconnected and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. Petitioner in W.P.No.24470 of 2008 claims to be the owner of plot bearing No.101, admeasuring 200 square yards, covered by Sy.No.93, situated at Boduppal Village, Ghatkesar Mandal of Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from one G. Bikshapathi, under registered sale deed dated 13.04.2004. It is her case that she submitted an application on 04.10.2008 to the respondent Gram Panchayat, requesting to grant her permission for construction of a residential house on the said plot, along with requisite documents, but as the respondent has not passed any orders thereon within the time specified under the proviso to Section 127 (3) of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, deeming that the permission is granted as per the said proviso, she proceeded with the constructions. It is her grievance that though she is entitled to proceed with the constructions under deemed permission as per law, the respondent is preventing her from proceeding with the constructions and threatening to demolish the structures if raised. Coming to W.P.No.24541 of 2008, it is the case of the petitioners therein that they have inherited the land in an extent of Ac.17.28 gts. in the aforesaid survey number i.e. Sy.No.93, and have been in possession and enjoyment of the same. It is their further case that questioning the orders of the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, refusing to grant them Occupancy Rights Certificate in respect of the said land, they filed W.P.No.3483 of 2006 before this Court and obtained interim suspension of the said orders of the Joint Collector. It is their grievance that, in spite of the pendency of the said W.P.No.3483 of 2006 and there being an order of interim suspension in their favour as stated supra, the respondent has been granting permissions to various individuals, who have no legal right, title and interest whatsoever over the land in Sy.No.93, for making constructions therein. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Gram Panchayat. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Gram Panchayat submits that, in view of the pendency of W.P.No.3483 of 2006 before this Court and as the title of the land in Sy.No.93 is in dispute, the respondent Gram Panchayat has not been granting permissions to any individuals for making constructions in the said survey number and, thus, the petitioner in W.P.No.24470 of 2008 is also not granted any permission and, therefore, she is not entitled to proceed with the constructions. In view of the above submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the relief sought for by the petitioner in W.P.No.24470 of 2008 cannot be granted at this stage. However, after the disposal of W.P.No.3483 of 2006, if she is found entitled for permission to make constructions in the extent of land claimed by her in Sy.No.93, the respondent is at liberty to consider her application for such permission in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. So far as W.P.No.24541 of 2008 is concerned, since it is stated that the respondent Gram Panchayat has not been granting any building permissions in respect of Sy.No.93, no orders are required to be passed. With the above observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 17th July, 2009 IBL