Telangana High Court
WP/28047/2009 of M/s. Bhagyanagar Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 29 December 2009
COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009 W.P.No.28047 of 2009 Between: M/S.Bhagyanagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., rep by its Secretary P.Venkat Ram Reddy ... PETITIONER(S) and The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Secretary,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THIS THE 29[th] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009
W.P.No.28047 of 2009
Between:
M/S.Bhagyanagar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., rep by itsSecretary P.Venkat Ram Reddy
and
... PETITIONER(S)
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Secretary, MunicipalAdministration Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …RESPONDENT(S)
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYW.P.No.28047 of 2009
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
Petitioner claims to have acquired Acs.167-00 of land inSy.No.1007 of Kukatpally Revenue Village, got the layout regularizedby the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and divided thesame into plots. Registered sale deeds have also been executed infavour of different persons. The grievance of the petitioner is that theGreater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation is trying to lay a road acrosstheir plots in deviation the master plan applicable for that area. Thepetitioner made a reference to a tender notice issued by the GreaterHyderabad Municipal Corporation proposing to lay a 100 feet roadfrom Hi-tech City Railway Station to Borabonda Railway Station.
The learned counsel for petitioner submits that 100 feet road in the proposed area was indicated in the master plan and the steps arebeing taken to lay the road with a different alignment altogether.
The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation, oninstructions, submits that the Corporation would strictly adhere to themaster plan in the matter of laying road from Hi-Tech City RailwayStation to Borabanda. It is also stated that if any portion of the land orbuilding owned by the petitioner is affected in laying the road, stepswill be taken in accordance with the provisions of the Land AcquisitionAct or the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act.
A copy of the master plan is placed before this Court. It showsthe alignment of the proposed road from Hi-Tech City Railway Stationto Borabanda. While the petitioner apprehends that the respondentswould deviate from the road shown in the master plan, the respondentsvirtually denied the said allegation.
Once the respondents state that they would lay the road strictlyin accordance with the master plan, the apprehension of the petitionerstands allayed or at least becomes unfounded. Even otherwise, incase any portion of the land or building of the petitioner is affected inthe process of laying road, the respondents would be under obligationto pay the compensation, as provided for under law.
With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J
29[th] December 2009CVRK