IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 5325 of 2007 Between: 1 Bikkavolu Mahalingam S/o. Late Rajeswara Rao R/o. 7-2-1, Rangireeju Street, Vizianagaram. 2 Bikkavolu Siva Krishna S/o. Late Rajeswara Rao R/o. 7-2-1, Rangireeju Street, Vizianagaram. 3 Bikkavolu Vishnupriya Devi D/o. Late Rajeswara Rao R/o. 7-2-1, Rangireeju Street, Vizianagaram. 4 Nagulukonda Venkata Narasimhaiah S/o. Venkata Ganapathi Rao R/o. D.No. 8-1-58, M.G. Road, Vizianagaram. 5 Dasari Badri Srinivas S/o. late Jagannadha Rao R/o. D.No. 8-1-58/C, M.G. Road, Vizianagaram. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its principal Secretary, Department of Roads and Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings, Department, Vizianagaram. 3 The Commissioner, Vizianagaram Municipalitym, Vizianagaram. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 issue a writ, of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondent authorities; i) In demolishing the petitioner's buildings bearing Door 7-6-1, 7-6-2, 7-6-3, 8- 1-58 and 8-1-58/C respectively with an assessment Nos. situated in M.G. R o a d , Vizianagaram 1093007372, 1093007392, 1093007394, 1093016018 and 1093032688 respectively situated at M.G. Road, Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram without either acquiring the properties of the petitioners or paying any compensation as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and contrary to Article 300-A of Constitution of India a n d violative of directions issued by this Hon'ble Curt in WP No. 9194/2005 ii) In widening the M.G. Road in between SBI Junction and Three Lanterns up to 80 feet against the sanctioned width of 60 feet is contrary to G.O.Ms.No. 291 dt. 28-7-2004 and opposed to public policy and iii) Consequently direct the respondent authorities to strictly adhered to G.O.Ms.No.291 dt. 28-7-2007 and the directions issued by the Hon'ble Court in WP No. 9194/2005 and iv) Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BALAJI MEDAMALLI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioners assert that they are the absolute owners and possessors of buildings bearing D. Nos. 7-6-1, 7-6-2, 7-6-3, 8-1-58 and 8-1-58/C respectively situated at M.G. Road, Vizianagarm, having acquired them from their ancestors. While so, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 291, dated 28.7.2004 according sanction to widen M.G. Road between State Bank of India Junction to Three Lamps Junction in Vizianagaram, from 45 feet to 60 feet. In pursuance of that G.O., it is the case of the petitioners that the 2nd and 3rd respondents, without issuing any notice and without paying any compensation, proposed to demolish the petitioners’ buildings for the purpose of widening the road from 45 feet to 60 feet. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, petitioners 1 to 3 and others filed W.P. No.9194 of 2005, and this Court, by its order dated 30.11.2005, while disposing of the writ petition directed the respondents- authorities to follow the directions issued by this Court in P.Lakshmana Rao Vs. Executive Officer[1]. In compliance of the said order, the 3rd respondent issued Notice dated 31.12.2005 asking the petitioners and other owners of the buildings to remove the structures and hand over the vacant possession of the land to the government for widening the road up to 80 feet. Thereupon, the petitioners state that they submitted detailed explanations and requested the respondents to initiate proceedings either under Land Acquisition Act or any other law and pay suitable compensation before they seek to acquire the land. Now the petitioners’ grievance is that respondents 2 and 3, without initiating proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act and without paying any compensation, are taking steps to widen the road up to 80 feet by marking their structures. The 2nd and 3rd respondents filed their counter affidavits. The 3rd respondent in his counter stated that the orders issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.291, dated 28.7.2004, is only an Administrative Sanction for widening the road, and they will follow the directions issued by the High Court before they seek to acquire the land of any person. The Zonal Development plan is a primary map, prepared keeping in view the census of the area, detailing how to develop Vizianagaram Town considering the present day and future needs and also keeping in view the analysis of physical, social and infrastructure facilities. As Per Zonal Development Plan, the government issued order proposing to widen the road to 80’-0” wide vide G.O.Ms.No.354, dated 30.6.2006. At present, there is no proposal of 80’-0” for widening the road from Clock Tower Junction to K.P. Temple Junction. However, it is contended by him that the Municipality will certainly follow the directions of the High Court in W.P. No. 9194 of 2005 and follow the due process of law if they intend to widen the road. In view of the averments made in the counter affidavit, both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: “In case the respondents require any part of the land of the petitioners for the purpose of widening the road, as undertaken by them, they shall follow due process of law before widening the road. “ Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 2nd February, 2009 bcj [1] 2000(5) ALT 246