Yellaturu Preetham vs V.B.Vijaya
2023 Latest Caselaw 826 Tel

        THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                   AND
            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


                 WRIT APPEAL No.706 of 2022
                                  AND
              WRIT PETITION No.30708 of 2022



COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)


       Heard Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel

for the appellant and Mr. B.Adinarayana Rao, learned

Senior Counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner.                 We

have also heard Ms. Laeeq Unnisa Begum, learned

Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural

Development Department appearing for respondents No.2,

4 and 6 in the writ appeal; Ms. D.Madhavi, learned

Standing Counsel for Hyderabad Metropolitan Development

Authority (HMDA) for respondent No.3 in the writ appeal;

and Mr. Kishore Rao Puskuru, learned Standing Counsel

appearing for respondent No.5 in the writ appeal.

2. W.A.No.706 of 2022 is directed against the order

dated 27.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in

I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.30708 of 2022.

3. Parties in this common judgment shall be referred to

as they are arrayed in W.A.No.706 of 2022.

4. Respondent No.1 has filed the related writ petition,

being W.P.No.30708 of 2022, seeking a direction to HMDA

and others to remove the encroachments and restore the

public road as gifted by M/s. Sri Vishnu Estates and

Developers to Mansanpally Panchayat vide the gift deed

dated 20.02.2010 contending that the said public road

leads to the layout of M/s. Sri Vishnu Estates and

Developers from the main road in which respondent No.1

has purchased a plot. Along with the writ petition, an

interlocutory application was filed for interim order, being

I.A.No.1 of 2022. Prayer made in I.A.No.1 of 2022 was to

direct HMDA and other authorities to forthwith restore the

public road and to ensure that there are no further

encroachments thereon during pendency of W.P.No.30708

of 2022.

5. Learned Single Judge by the order dated 27.09.2022

expressed the prima facie opinion that there is ample

evidence to show existence of 40 feet wide road passing

through Survey No.324 even prior to the year 2007 and

therefore, the authorities are under obligation to restore

the said 40 feet wide road treating the same as a public

road. In view thereof, an interim direction was issued by

the learned Single Judge to HMDA and other authorities to

restore the 40 feet wide road forthwith after duly removing

the encroachments or any constructions, if any, made by

the appellant and respondent No.7. Further, learned

Single Judge restrained the appellant and respondent No.7

from interfering with/encroaching any part of the 40 feet

wide road passing through Survey No.324, pending further

orders.

6. It is against the aforesaid order dated 27.09.2022

that the present writ appeal, being W.A.No.706 of 2022,

came to be filed.

7. This Court after hearing learned Senior Counsel for

the appellant as well as learned Senior Counsel for

respondent No.1 passed an order on 01.11.2022 staying

the order dated 27.09.2022 as well as further proceedings

in W.P.No.30708 of 2022.

8. For vacating the aforesaid order dated 01.11.2022,

respondent No.1 has filed I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.A.No.706

of 2022.

9. We have heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for

both the sides.

10. In the course of the hearing, a consensus has

emerged that insofar contention of respondent No.1 that

there is a public road leading to the layout of M/s. Sri

Vishnu Estates and Developers in which respondent No.1

has purchased a plot and that there is encroachment on

the said road, it should be referred to HMDA for a final

determination of facts. In this connection, it is further

submitted that HMDA may also consider whether the 40

feet wide road passes through Survey No.324 or Survey

No.323.

11. In view of the above, HMDA i.e., respondent No.3,

represented by its Commissioner, is directed to hear both

the appellant as well as respondent No.1, make necessary

survey, consider the relevant land documents and

thereafter take an appropriate decision in accordance with

law. Since both the parties are present before the Court,

we direct appellant and respondent No.1 to appear before

respondent No.3 on 06.03.2023 at 11:00 am whereafter

Commissioner of HMDA shall do the needful in terms of

this order. Whatever decision is taken by the

Commissioner, HMDA, the same shall be communicated to

both the parties and thereafter appropriate steps, if

deemed necessary, may be taken in accordance with law.

The said exercise shall be carried out within a period of six

weeks from the date of appearance of the parties.

12. Needless to say, in view of the order passed today,

order dated 27.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge

in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.30708 of 2022 is hereby set

aside.

13. Consequently, both W.A.No.706 of 2022 and

W.P.No.30708 of 2022 are disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 17.02.2023 vs