Hydrabad Urban Development ... vs Ms. Lavanya Madiraj,
2021 Latest Caselaw 3286 Tel

          The Hon'ble The Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
                                              and
                 The Hon'ble Sri Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy
                             Writ Appeal No.1162 of 2005
Judgment: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

        The present appeal is arising out of order dated 05.02.2004, passed

by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No. 13192 of 2002.

2.      The facts of the case reveal that the respondent/writ petitioner,

claiming to be owner of Acs.14.08 guntas of land in Survey Nos.23, 24,

25, 26, 27 and 28 of Nacharam Village, Uppal Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District, filed the Writ Petition stating that the appellant/Hyderabad

Metropolitan Development Authority (HUDA) is interfering with her

possession.

3. Reply was filed by HUDA stating that the land in question is a part

of a tank by name Patel Cheruvu and it is one of the 169 lakes that have

been identified for preservation and maintenance. It was also stated that

HUDA is not interfering with the possession of the respondent/writ

petitioner in any manner except reinforcing the bund of the tank to

ensure that it retains the water. Writ Petition was disposed of keeping in

view of the aforesaid circumstances. However, it was directed that

HUDA shall not interfere with the possession of the respondent/writ

petitioner. Writ Appeal was preferred immediately in the matter by

HUDA and it was stated that the HUDA is making all sincere efforts to

preserve the lake and they are ensuring that no encroachment takes place

in the lake area.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the present Writ Appeal

deserves to be disposed of with liberty to the appellant/HUDA to take

appropriate steps in accordance with law for preserving the lake in

question. The appellant/HUDA shall also ensure that no encroachment

takes place in respect of the lake area and the encroachments, if any in the

lake area, be removed after following due process of law.

5. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of.

Consequently, Interlocutory Applications, pending if any, stand

dismissed.

_______________________ Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ

____________________ A. Rajasheker Reddy, J Date: 08.11.2021 lur