Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Gajjala Manjularani vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 4 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION No.58 of 2024
Gajjala Manjularani, W/o Gajjala
Parthasaradhi, aged about 53 years, R/o
D.No.5-57, Sunkulamma Street, Nandyala
Town and Mandal, Kurnool District and two
others.
... Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its
Principal Secretary, MA and UD Department,
Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur
District and another.
... Respondents.
Counsel for the petitioners : Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy
Counsel for respondent No.1 : GP for Municipal Administration
& Urban Development
Counsel for respondent No.3 : Sri Kalava Suresh Kumar Reddy
ORDER
The writ petition is filed seeking following relief -
"... to issue Writ or order direction one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in laying the road through the petitioners land covered by Sy.No.51/1, 52, 53/1 of Kalluru village Kurnool by way of widening the existing road into 100 feet as per master plan without initiating the Land Acquisition proceedings or issuing the TDR certificates 2 SRSJ WP No.58 of 2024 though the petitioners have consented to receive the TDR certificates for their affected road widening portion through their consent letters dated 19.09.2023 is as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and violation of Article 21 300A of Constitution of India and contrary to Rule 168 of A.P. Building Rules, 2017 and consequently direct the respondents not to lay any road through the petitioners land covered by Sy.Nos.51/1, 52 and 53/1 of Kalluru village, Kurnool without paying the compensation or without issuing the TDR certificates as required under Rule 168 of A.P. Building Rules, 2017 as amended in G.O.Ms.No.223 dated 09.07.2018 pursuant to the consent letters dated 19.09.2023 submitted by the petitioners ... ...".
2. Heard Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Anand Surya, learned counsel representing Sri Kalava Suresh Kumar Reddy, learned standing counsel for 2nd respondent.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners would submit that the 2nd petitioner is the owner of an extent of Ac.8.40 cents in S.No.51/1 and Ac.9.02 cents in S.No.51/3. 1st petitioner is the owner of an extent of Ac.2.01 cents in S.No.52 of Kalluru village. He would also submit that 2nd respondent proposed to extend the existing road into 100 feet road as per master 3 SRSJ WP No.58 of 2024 plan. The petitioners' lands in S.Nos.51, 52 & 53 are located abutting the road. Without acquiring the land, the authorities are intending to lay the road. He would submit that petitioners are ready to part with the land, if the respondent- authorities provide TDR certificates. He would also submit that respondent-authorities may lay road at any moment.
4. Learned standing counsel for 2nd respondent would submit that Corporation is taking steps to issue TDR certificate for any site towards road development plan. As per the written instructions of the Commissioner, Kurnool Municipal Corporation, he would also submit that compensation will be examined to the petitioners in the form of TDR certificate at the time of developing 60 feet master plan by following due procedure.
5. Recording the submission of learned standing counsel for 2nd respondent-Corporation, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Corporation to follow due procedure, if they intend to acquire the petitioners' land for the purpose of developing 60 feet master plan. Till such exercise is completed, the respondent-authorities shall not 4 SRSJ WP No.58 of 2024 interfere with petitioners' possession over the subject land. No costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI 4th January, 2024 PVD