HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.15205 of 2008 Date : 13-7-2011 Between : S.Raghu Rama Reddy and others .. Petitioners and Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Malkajgiri Circle, represented by its Commissioner, Hyderabad .. Respondents Counsel for petitioners : Sri T.Rajanikanth Reddy Counsel for respondent : Sri R.Radha Krishna Reddy, Standing Counsel for GHMC The court made the following: 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. This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in commencing the process of laying road through plot Nos.53, 54, 61 and 62 of S.Nos.856/1-2 and 859 of Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners pleaded that petitioner No.2 and the respective fathers of petitioner Nos.1 and 3 have purchased plots under different sale deeds. Their grievance is that plot Nos.53, 54, 61 and 62 which are at the border of the layout are being proposed to be utilized for laying a road. The Deputy Commissioner of Malkajgiri, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) filed a counter- affidavit wherein it is inter alia stated that in the layout approved by the Malkajgiri Gram Panchayat in the year 1965 in respect of Sy.No.856/1-2 and 859, plot Nos.53, 54, 61 and 62 are not in existence and that there is an existing road of 30 ft. width between Hanumanpet and Jyothinagar apart from a big masonry storm water drain of about 8 ft. width constructed 15 years ago and that the respondents only proposed to lay a cement concrete road on the existing kacha road. In para-6 of the counter-affidavit, it is stated that the respondent-Corporation has already laid the C.C. road on the existing road between Hanumanpet and Jyothinagar as per the approved modified layout prepared by the Malkajgiri Gram Panchayat in the year 1967. From the rival pleadings it is clear that there is a serious dispute as to the existence of plot Nos.53, 54, 61 and 62. The petitioners have filed a purported plan showing the existence of the said plots in Sy.Nos.856/1-2 and 859 in support of their plea that such plots are in existence. They have not filed the original approved layout pertaining to the plots in question. In my opinion, when the respondent has raised a serious dispute with respect to the very existence of the plots itself, it is not possible for this court to decide this disputed question of fact while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In order to resolve this dispute, it is necessary for the parties to adduce evidence, oral and documentary, upon which the competent civil court will be able to decide the same. Therefore, while declining to interfere with the proposed action of the respondent by dismissing the Writ Petition, the petitioners are permitted to avail the common law remedy of a civil suit to assert their rights over the plots in question and claim appropriate relief. As a sequel, WPMP No.19676/2008 is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 13-7-2011 AM