High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circum$tances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to lssue any Writ, Order or directions more particularly issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notice No Lr. No O7IRW/ACp/cir- 10/GHMC/2024 Dated 21- 11- 2024 received on 22- 11- 2024 as illegal, Arbitrary, void, inoperative and in violation of Article 14, Article 2l,Article 300- A of Constitution of lndia and in violation of principles of natural iustice and GHMC Act and Consequently this Hon'ble court may be pleased to direct the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No 3 and 7 to follow the provisions of Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and award compensati9n to the Petitioner 1e1 {gqrJisition of property bearing No 19- 4- ?7411011, in Sufvey No 259/1 , admgasuring 25, a3 Sq Yards, situated at MirAlam Filter, Main Boad, Tadban, Hyderahad, T $. , as per the Act before acqr;iring the property and Qonsequentially to pasQ an interim direction thereby direating the Respondents not to acquire petitionQrs property bearing No '19- 4- 27411011, in Survey llo 259/1 , admeasqring 25 43 Sq Yards, situated at Mir Alam Filt9r' Main RoEd, Tadban, l.lyderahad, T 9. for road widening, without awar(ing compensation. ANO:'lOF2 24 Petition under Sectign 151 CPC praying that in the circumstancbs stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hig[ Court may pe please-d to pass an interim QlrgQtion therqby directing the Bespondents not to acquire pqtitioners prope(y bearing No 19- 4' 274110t1, in survey Nq 25911 , adryteasur:ing 25 43 Sq' Yards, situaled at Mir Alam Filter, Main Road, Tadban, Hyderabad, T. S , for road widening, wilhgut awardiRg compqnsation, pgndlng diqposal of the above writ petif ion. Counsel for lhe Petitioner: SRI MUSTAFA BASIT!.I Counsel for: th.e ReFpondent Nos.1 and 2: ASST. GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.Q to 8: SRI RAPARTHY VENKATESH' SC The Court mqde the following: OROER HON'BLE SRTJUSTTCE K. LAKSHMAN W.P. No.3 6166 0F 2024 ORDER: . Heard Mr. Mustafa Basith, learned counsel for the petitioner' leamed Asst.Govt.Pleader for revenue and Sri Raparthy Venkatesh, leamed standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos'3 to 8'

2. The petitioner herein is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of a house bearing H'No'19-4-27411.011' admeasuring 78 sq'yards near ldgah Mir Atam tank' Hyderabad' on the strength of a registered gift settlement deed bearing document No.1466 of 2007, dated 25'06'2007' Like wise' he is also claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of a another house bearing H.No' t9-4-274llOll admeasuring 370 sq.yards in the same area, on the strength of a bearing registered documentNo.l467of2007,dated25'06'2007'Thus'thepetitioner is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the aforesaid two houses ( for short, 'subject houses') to total extent of 448 sq.yards and he is in possession of the said property' He has been paying property tax to respondents - Corporation' a 2

3. Wliite the matter stood thus, 8th respondent has issued notice dated 2l .11.2024 stating that GHMC has proposed the widening of road from Miralam Tank to Zoo park situated at Tadbunm Bahadurpura, Hyderabad. H.No.l9-4-274ll 0/1, Miralam Tank, Hyderabad along with ten other properties (total I I properties) are affected in the said road widening program to the extent of25.43 sq.yards. 6'h respondent had addressed a letter dated

14.06.2024 to 3'd respondent with a request to send the land acquisition proposals under Sections 146 and 147 of HMC Act,

1955. Vide letter dated 09.11.2024,3'd respondent informed 8'h respondent that the subject houses of the petitioner are lalling under the nature of land 'Road-G' and further 3'd respondent has issued letter dated l4.l 1.2024 witha request to 8h respondent to takc up acquisition of the petitioners properties as per G.O.Ms.No.275, MA&UD (GHMC-II) Departrnent, dated 2l .lO.2O17. Thus, 8'h respondent informed the petitioner that since the road eff'ected portion is 25.43 sq.yards in H.No. l9-4-274/l0ll, Milalam 'l'ank, Hyderabad is falling under 'Road-G'. As per survey report datc(l 09.11.2024, it is clear that the petitioner has J encroached 'Road-G' area which is a govemment land and therefore he is not entitled for any compcnsation for the road effected portion. 8rh respondent has further informed the petitioner that his claim of ownership over the 'Road-G' area at the premises of H.No.19-4-27411011, Miralam Tank, Hyderabad, by virtue of registered gift settlement deed dated 25.06.2007 vide document No. 1467 of 2007 and the same is against the encroachment of 'Road-G'. Therefore, Sth respondent directed the petitioner to surrenderftrand over possession of 25.43 sq.yards from the aforesaid house within seven (7) days. Chatlenging the said notice, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. Respondent Nos.5 to 8 filed counter contending that the aforesaid effected area of 25.43 sq.yards is encroached by the petitioner. Therefore, they have removed the encroachments in the subject property along with the adjoining other properties on

28.11.2024. They have already taken possession of the road effected portion of the subject property along with the other properties. In proof of the same, they have filed photographs with 4 regard to encroached property. Therefore, the pelitioner is not entitled lbr anv compensation.

5. As per G.O.Ms.No.275, MAUD GHMC No.2 Depa(ment, dated 27. 10.20 I 7, respondent-Corporation is not liable to pay cornpensation in respect of land value to the petitioner for road etlected portion ln respect of encroachments of Govemment land and Corporation is required to pay structure value in respect of the portion ofthe property effected in the road widening proglamme. ln the present case, structure value for the structures etl'ectcd in the road widening programme is Rs. 14.546 + 1000/" solitariutn i.e. Rs.29,0921- (14,526 x 2). Therefore, respondent oftlcials havc already initiated the process for payment of the said anrount. The petitioner filed the present writ petition with a mala fide intention for wrongful gain. 'l'herefore, they sought to disnriss the writ petition

6. As discussed supra, the petitioner is clainring right over the subject houses consisting of448 sq.yards under two registered gill settlernent deeds. Respondent Nos.5 to 8 dispossessed them from the sairl property and demolished to the extent of 25.43 r.t 5 sq.yards. According to respondent Nos.5 to 8' petitioner encroached public road. They have only demolished the encroached area. They have not demolished or dispossessed the petitioner from his subject houses. The total extent of the subject houses of the petitioner is admeasuring Ac.448 sq.yards. Survey was also conducted. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for only structure vaIue.

7. Thus, there is dispute with regard to the demolition of structure in the effected area. Therefore, respondent No'8 has directed to measure the extent of both the houses of the petitioner as mentioned in the schedule of the aforesaid two registered gift settlement dssds. Liberty is granted to respondent Nos'3 and 8 to take the assislance of revenue authorities for measuring the said property. If the allegation made by the petitioner that the respondent Nos.4 to 8 dispossessed the petitioner from the aloresaid subject houses admeasuring 25.43 sq.yards out of 448 sq.yards is found to be correct, they shall pay compensation to the petitioner herein in accordance with the procedure laid down under law. tf the contention of respondent Nos.4 to 8 that they have only -'t II I 6 demolished the encroached area and that the petitioner is entitled for only strurcture value. they shall pay the same in accordance with law G.O.lvls.No.275 MAUD, GHMC Department, dated

27.10.2017 Lo thc pctitioner herein within four (4) weeks.

8. In view of' the above discussion, this writ petition is disposed ol. Rcspondent No.8 is dilected to meastrre the extent of both the houses of the petitioner as mentioned in the schedule of the aforesaid two registered gift seltlement deeds. Lib6rty IS granted to respondent Nos.3 and 8 to take the assislance ol rcvenue authorities firr rneasuring the said property. If the allegation made by the petitioner that the respondent Nos.4 to 8 dispossessed the petitioner firrrn the atirresaid subject houses and demolished to the extent of' 2-i..13 sc1.1,ards out of 448sq.yards, they shall pay compensatiorr to the petitioner herein in accordance with the procedure laiil down under law. If the contention of respondent Nos.4 to 8 that they have only demolished the encroached area and that the petitioner is entitled for only structure value, they shatl pay the same in accordance with law G.O.Ms.No.275 MAtlD, GHMC Department. dated 27. lr0.2017 to the petitioner herein within four (.! 7 (4) weeks. However, they shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shalt stand closed. ASS i?'il:"iS+S^H //TRUE COPY'/ SECTION OFFICER To, squth Zene' GHMC' irl#ltffi**ofutt*nr='=='., : i|n!"iffihl3At fLlta]ti,','o"o^'^n'' n"l* : +.i:tr],e%t'rlo*o nr'nnins seclion' cir*re 10' south zooe' GHMc' ilffi:ttii8f$Hl f-'r ili$iiilTl;::[:':;i' Id (e- ,,,,er.t""ittSS?tun'rlBaanvvenkatesh,$ctqPoucl tz two GD coPPF 'o HIGH COURT DATED:2510212025 ORDER WP.No.36166 of 2024 f ,1i i> -_:'-., I6 2 5 I'iAt 20'25 t 'a' I I \,li. ! ':' -\: i;_,'.-,- ' I z o .b, <\- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS f+ 3 r--S