HONIOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 28389 OF 2007 DATED 9TH OCTOBER, 2014.
BETWEEN Mamidi Sujatha and ors ….Petitioners.
And Amudalavalasa Municipality, Amudalavalasa, Srikakulam District, Rep. by its Commissioner.
…Respondent.
HONIOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 28389 OF 2007
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
The petitioners herein were assigned small extents of land in Sy.No.97 of Amudalavalasa village of Srikakulam District. The petitioners have constructed thatched houses and were residing therein. As the said land was situated adjacent to main road, during the widening of road, the thatched houses of the petitioners were removed. Thereafter, the petitioners have again raised thatched houses and were residing therein. While so, the Tahsildar issued notice dated 4.4.2005 stating that the petitioners have violated Condition No.2 of the assignment pattas by not constructing houses within the prescribed period and that Survey No. 97 is being used as a bus-stand and also asked them to show cause as to why the assignment granted in their favour should not be cancelled. The petitioners submitted their explanation to the said show case notice. However, no action has been taken. Thereafter, the petitioners made applications to the A.P. Housing Corporation Limited for grant of house loans and as the said Corporation was insisting for the possession certificate, upon the application made by the petitioners, the Mandal Revenue Officer after conducting an enquiry gave possession certificate on 5.7.2005 which was counter signed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the same was forwarded to the Deputy Executive Engineer (Housing), Srikakulam for sanction of housing loan. When the said applications are pending consideration, the Revenue Divisional Officer passed orders on 10.10.2006 stating that the petitioners have violated the assignment patta conditions and thereby resumed the land. The said order was challenged in Writ Petition No. 23467 of 2006 and a learned single Judge of this Court dismissed the same, against which, Writ Appeal No. 1312 of 2006 was preferred and a Division Bench of this Court allowed the same by order dated 15.12.2006. Thereafter, the petitioners submitted application for grant of permission for construction of houses. Pursuant to the same, the petitioners were informed that no permission is required for construction of houses by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.422, dated 31.07.1998. When the petitioners are proceeding to construct the houses, the respondent is interfering with their construction activity and therefore, the petitioners have submitted representation to the respondent on 23.1.2007 and also got issued legal notice on 18.8.2007. Despite the same, the respondent is interfering with the constructions being made by the petitioners. Challenging the same, the present Writ petition was filed.
The learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that by virtue of the orders of the Division Bench of this Court, the petitioners have to obtain necessary permission as required for construction of houses. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that if the petitioners submitted their applications for grant of necessary sanction for construction of houses, the respondent may be directed to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
In view of the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the applications as and when made by the petitioners seeking necessary sanction for construction of houses and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 9TH OCTOBER 2014.
Msnro