Kalyani Kannaiah Mokkapati vs The State Of Telangana
2025 Latest Caselaw 1799 Tel

Telangana High Court

Kalyani Kannaiah Mokkapati vs The State Of Telangana on 5 February, 2025

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. V. BHASKAR REDDY

               WRIT PETITION No.17104 OF 2024

ORDER:

The writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

"...to issue a writ direction or order more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent with regard to non regularizing the surplus land admeasuring 501.60 square meters in Plot No.82 in Survey No.67 Madhapur Village Ranga Reddy District pursuant to the application no F1/455/2625/2005 submitted by the vendor of the petitioner namely Smt. K. Nageswari and to declare the action of the 6th respondent in issuing proceedings dated 29.04.2024 rejecting the change of building permission from residential to hostel and to set aside the same by issuing consequential direction to dispose of the application no.F1/455/2625/2005 pending before the 2nd respondent herein and by further declaring that the impugned inaction as being illegal arbitrary and resulting in infringing the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) and 300 A of the Constitution of India and pass ..."

2. Heard Mr. Prabhakara Chandra Mouli, learned Senior Counsel,

appearing for Mr. Satya Sadhan Chalamala, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Mr. D.V. Chalapathi Rao, learned Government Pleader for

Assignment.

3. It is stated that petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor

of the Plot No.82 admeasuring 600 square yards in Survey No.67 of

Jubilee Enclave, Madhapur, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased

the same vide registered sale deed bearing document No.878 of 2020

dated 21.01.2020. It is stated that petitioner has obtained building

permission vide proceedings dated 02.06.2020 and constructed 1 stilt

plus five upper floors in the subject property. On 05.12.2023, when

petitioner filed application for changing the nature of building from

residential to hostel use, respondent No.6 - the Zonal Commissioner,

Serilingampally Zone, GHMC, Hyderabad, rejected the application of

the petitioner stating that the subject property falls under the Urban

Land Ceiling Act 1976 (for short 'ULC Act').

4. It is further stated that the vendor of the petitioner has filed

application for regularization of the subject property under

G.O.Ms.No.455 dated 29.07.2002 vide application No.F1

/455/2625/005 by remitting requisite amount vide D.D.No.478197

dated 23.09.2005 and Challan No.70384 dated 05.10.2005 in favour

of the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling,

Hyderabad. After conducting due enquiry, the Government has

recommended for regularization of the subject property. It is stated

that vendor of the petitioner has addressed letter dated 06.07.2012 to

the Government seeking ULC clearance, to which, the Government

has issued memo dated 21.08.2012 directing the petitioner to submit

No Objection Certificate (NOC) from other legal heirs. Accordingly,

the vendor of the petitioner submitted legal heir certificate and NOC

through letter dated 31.10.2014. The Government issued a memo

dated 11.12.2019 to the vendor of the petitioner stating that a detailed

report was submitted to the Chief Commissioner of Land

Administration (CCLA) and further orders are awaited.

5. Grievance of the petitioner is that despite the subject property

forming part of approved layout of Hyderabad Metropolitan

Development Authority (HMDA), and even after complying with all

the requirements in terms of G.O. Ms.No.455 dated 29.07.2002,

respondents have not issued any proceedings regularizing the subject

property and issued proceedings rejecting the change of nature of

building from residential to hostel use.

6. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.4 - the Special

Officer, Urban Land Ceiling, Ranga Reddy District, respondents have

not disputed submission of application by vendor of the petitioner for

regularization of the subject property as per the Policy enunciated by

the Government in G.O. Ms.No.455 Revenue (UC.I) Department

dated 29.07.2002 and G.O.Ms.No.747 Revenue (UC.I) Department

dated 18.06.2008. They have also not disputed remittance of

regularization amount by the vendor of the petitioner. Except stating

that writ petition is not maintainable, no reasons whatsoever are

forthcoming for not passing orders and withholding the application

for regularization of subject property of the vendor of the petitioner

all these years.

7. Learned Senior Counsel placed reliance on the judgment of

this Court in W.P. No.2126 of 2023 dated 22.02.2023 and submitted

that this Court has directed the respondents therein to consider the

regularization application submitted by the applicant therein in

respect of the lands in Survey Nos.34, 35/Part, 36/Part, 37, 38 and 39

of Guttalabegumpet Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District, and also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in

W.P. No.42206 of 2017 dated 06.06.2023, and submitted that in the

lands forming part of same survey number i.e., 66 and 67 of

Madhapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,

this Court has set aside notices issued under Section 10(5) and 10(6)

of the ULC Act as non-est, null and void and directed the respondents

therein to refund the amount of Rs.15,80,095/- paid by the petitioner

therein towards regularization of land.

8. On a careful examination of the above judgments relied upon

by the petitioner and its applicability to the lands in Survey Nos.66

and 67 and the relief sought in this writ petition is also relating to

Survey No.67, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would

be met, if the respondents are directed to pass orders in the

regularization application submitted by vendor of the petitioner, as

expeditiously as possible, in any event, not later than eight (8) weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. Learned Senior Counsel fairly submitted that even though the

petitioner and his vendor are entitled for refund of amount deposited

in terms of Policy enunciated by the Government as per G.O.

Ms.No.455 Revenue (UC.I) Department dated 29.07.2002, as per the

judgment dated 06.06.2023 of this Court in W.P. No.42206 of 2017,

they are restricting their claim for passing orders in the regularization

application submitted by the vendor of the petitioner.

10. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose

of the writ petition directing respondent No.2 - the Chief

Commissioner of Land Administration, Telangana, to pass orders in

the regularization application No.F1/455/2625/2005 submitted by the

vendor of the petitioner, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order.