Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sirshipalli Devudamma vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 August, 2020
Author: M.Ganga Rao
Bench: M.Ganga Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO
Writ Petition No. 4658 of 2020
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to consider the objections filed by petitioner dated 20.01.2020 by reviewing the proceedings of the Vice-Chairman, VUDA, Visakhapatnam in Rc.No. 9809/08/L2 dated 10.01.2013 and Rc.No.9811/08/L3 dated 01.10.2013, whereby the unapproved plots in an extent of 795.95 Sq.mts in Sy.No.139/3,4P,13A/P and 454.198 Sq.mts in Sy.No.139/1P in favour of respondents 5 and 6 respectively were regularized.
2. The case of the petitioner is that she is in possession of wet land extent Ac.1.27 cents in R.S.No.139/13 (old Sy.No.90) of Gajuwaka Urban Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, apart from extent Ac.0.31 cents in R.S.No.139/3. The said land was issued vide T.D.No.32 under Inam Patta, which was inherited by her father-in-law by name Sirishapalli Yellaiah and enjoyed during his life time. After death of her father-in-law, her husband being one of the legal heirs enjoyed the property till his demise. Her father-in-law sold his self-acquired property of an extent of 12 ½ cents to one Sanyasi Rao by registered Document No.2414 of 1950. But, neither her father-in-law nor his legal heirs sold the property 2 admeasuring Ac.1.27 cents to any third party. The respondents 4 and 5 with a mala fide intention and to deprive her rights over land extent Ac.0.31 cents, approached the 2nd respondent by filing representation seeking regulation of unapproved plot in Sy.No.139/13P for 454.98 Sq. mts. and Sy.No.139/3, 4P, 13/A/P for 795.05 Sq. mts. as if the land is covered vide Sale document No.2414 of 1950. The 2nd respondent also issued proceedings 9809/08/L2 dated 10.01.2013 and Rc.No.9811/08/L3 dated 01.10.2013 for regulating open plots in favour of respondents 5 and 6. Then, she filed a representation dated 20.01.2010 to the 2nd respondent to restrain the respondents 5 and 6 from carrying out the construction work, but the respondent authorities have not taken any action. Assailing the inaction of the respondents, this writ petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent was issued proceedings dated 10.01.2013 and 01.10.2013 in favour of respondents 5 and 6 without conducting inspection and without issuing notice to the petitioner as per rules. The respondents 5 and 6 are making constructions over the property of the petitioner without obtaining permission from the 4th respondent though subject property are in two different survey numbers.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel and on 3 perusal of the record, this Court, in the interest of justice, felt it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh detailed representation along with necessary documents to the 2nd respondent to review the proceedings 9809/08/L2 dated 10.01.2013 and Rc.No.9811/08/L3 dated 01.10.2013 of the Vice-Chairman, VUDA, Visakhapatnam, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On submission of such representation, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the same as per law by giving notice to the respondents 5 and 6 and the affected persons and pass appropriate reasoned order within a period of eight (8) weeks thereafter, and communicate the same to the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
6. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall also stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO 06-08-2020 anr 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO Writ Petition No. 4658 of 2020 06-08-2020 anr