Bandla Pushpa vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 6437 Tel

       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

             WRIT PETITION No.5864 of 2022

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

"....to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the arbitrary action of the respondent No. 2 and 3 in non-considering the representation of the petitioner and non-initiating to allot the open Plot admeasuring 10 Sq.yards on market rate in Housing Board Colony, which is un-useful and which is situated at in front of the house of the petitioner House bearing No.17-1-376/B2/F1, Ground Floor, MIG Phase-III, Santhosh Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, basing on the representations of the petitioner on 03.07.2017 and 26.10.2021 is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice and also in violation of violation of Articles.14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner, and to allot the open Plot admeasuring 10 Sq. yards on market rate in Housing Board Colony, which is un-useful and which is situated at infront of the house of the petitioner House bearing No.17-1-376/B2/F1, Ground Floor, MIG Phase-III, Santhosh Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad, basing on the representations of the petitioner on 03.07.2017 and 26.10.2021".

::2::

2. Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, the learned Counsel for

the petitioner and Sri K.Buchi Babu, the learned Standing

Counsel for the respondents.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is the owner of the House bearing

No.17-1-376/B2/F1, Ground Floor, MIG Phase-III,

Santhosh Nagar, Saidabad, Hyderabad having purchased

the same from one Sri T.Gouri Shankar through registered

sale deed No.5149 of 2016 on the file of the SRO,

Musarambagh on 19.10.2016. At the time of construction

of house by the Housing Corporation the compound wall

was not constructed to the individual apartments. There is

10 Sq. Yards of land vacant in front of the petitioner's flat

and the petitioner fenced the said 10 Sq.Yards and merged

it into the house of the petitioner and thereafter the

petitioner approached the respondent No.2 and 3 and made

representations on 3.7.2017 and 26.10.2021 to allot the

same to her based on the market value, but the ::3::

respondents authorities did not allot the same to the

petitioner. In view of non-disposing of the representations

filed by the petitioner, the present Writ Petition is filed.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submit

that the Housing Board Regularization, 1991 as approved

by the G.O.M.S.No.48(HB2) Department dated 20.04.1992

applied to all the multi-stored apartment buildings

constructed by the Telangana Housing Board as per the

rule thereof, the ownership of the apartment land shall

jointly in all the flat owners of the building in all the multi-

storied buildings constructed by the Housing Board. The

apartments land shall not put to any use for growing

vegetable plants by any flat owners. None of the flat

owners including the owners of the ground floor shall have

any right of construction or raise any additional

accommodation over the allotted land. As per rule 5, the

flat owners may be permitted to construct compound wall

for the protection and privacy. The Telangana Housing ::4::

Board has its power to sell the lands or buildings by

conducting the public auction as per the law allowed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Court in several

cases. The property belongs to the Housing Board and held

that the property belongs to the public authorities can sell

by way of conducting public auction and not by the private

negotiations in order to ensure the transparency and give

opportunity to the interested persons at maximum price

has been held that any other method of disposal of public

property would be arbitrary.

5. The present land is less than 100 Sq. Yards as it has

commercial value, it has been sold by public auction.

Therefore, the petitioner has no right to demand to sell the

adjacent land to her. The respondents have no power to

allot the subject land basing on the representation made by

the petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court,

time and again held that the state owned/public owned

properties can not be dealt with the absolute discretion of ::5::

the extent and public interest is in paramount

consideration. The only method of securing interest of the

public and dispose of the property by public auction or by

inviting tenders.

6. The judgments relied by the learned Standing Counsel

appearing for the respondents is squarely apply to the

instant case and in view of the same the writ petition is

liable to be dismissed as the petitioner has no right to seek

allotment of the land without any auction.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall

no order as to costs.

8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH

05.12.2022

spk