Mallimpalli Kanyakumari v. The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No.12896 OF 2012 ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed by 36 petitioners in all seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps to demolish the structures of the residential premises of the petitioners bearing Door Nos.4-73/1 to 4-73/23 etc., of Gandhinagar, Mangalapalem village, Duvvada Post, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam without recourse to law. It is the case of the petitioners that all of them belong to weaker sections of the society and they have raised small sheds and thatched huts for residential purposes in Gandhinagar, Mangalapalem Village, Duvvada Post, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam, presently within the jurisdiction of Greater Visakha Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam (in short "GVMC"). The Municipality has allotted door numbers to the sheds of the petitioners from 4-73/1 to 4-73/23 etc.
, and the Electricity Department has also issued service connection under Service No.253 etc., to the petitioners. They were also issued Voter Identity cards, allotted house numbers by the municipal authorities, collecting municipal taxes from the petitioners. Petitioners are categorically asserted that they have been in occupation and enjoyment of the said property for more than 25 years and at no point of time there was any interference from anyone.
They further assert that they have been making representations to the authorities to regularise their occupation and grant house site pattas in their favour. While the things stood thus on 23.04.2012 certain officials from the 1st respondent have threatened to demolish and remove the constructions demanding
them to handover the possession of the site to the 1st respondent within 3 days. They were not issued any notices, there is no due process of law that was followed. As the 1st respondent is the statutory authority constituted for the purpose of creating infrastructure facilities for setting up of the industries, the revenue authorities are also aiding them in the process, the petitioners filed this writ petition seeking protection of this court. It is also asserted that there are no proceedings issued either under the Land Encroachment Act or under any enactment. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent sworn by General Manager of the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited (in short "APIIC"). In the counter affidavit it has been asserted that an extent of Ac.
50-61 1⁄2 cents of private land in Duvvada Village of Gajuwaka Mandal, was acquired during the years 1981 to 1983 and also an extent of Ac.34-81 cents of Government land was handed over to the Steel Plant authorities for laying railway lines. Subsequently these lands were earmarked and transferred to APIIC vide proceedings in Rc.No.314/90 G1, dt.13.08.1990 by the then Special Officer of Land Acquisition, Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam. Further, an extent of Ac.7-77 cents of patta land was also acquired and returned to Steel Plant authorities. In all, finally an extent of Ac.77-65 1⁄2 cents was left in the possession of the APIIC and an extent of Ac.29-61 1⁄2 cents of land was consented to be given to M/s. Ramky Pharma City (India) Pvt. Ltd., (in short "M/s. Ramky"). M/s. Ramky was given provisional allotment on 27.07.
2007 and they paid a sum of Rs.4,44,22,500/- on various dates i.e., 02.12.2006, 29.12.2006 and 09.01.2007. Various transactions entered by the 1st respondent in favour of the M/s.
also set out in the counter affidavit. The possession of the petitioners is specifically denied and the contention of the petitioners that the GVMC authorities have allotted door numbers to the petitioners' residence has also been denied. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent-Tahasildar.
When the matter was listed on 09.12.20015 this court on perusal of the record and particularly the documents filed in support of the writ petition viz., the voter identity cards, GVMC tax payment receipts along with the photographs, had directed the learned counsel for the 1st respondent whether the 1st respondent is willing for this court appointing an Advocate Commissioner to assert the allegations made in the writ petition as well as the assertions made by the respondents in the counter affidavit.
When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent fairly submits that his client did not have objection if a joint survey is conducted with the respondents, and if a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent to enquire into the matter and by giving liberty to the 1st respondent to take necessary steps in accordance with law to seek eviction of the petitioners after conducting of the survey. Inasmuch as, the prayer of the petitioners is also that their possession and enjoyment shall not be interfered without following due process of law, the request made on behalf of the 1st respondent is just and proper.
In the circumstances the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to conduct a survey of the
subject land, and in the event the survey reveals the land as belonging to the 1st respondent, 1st respondent is at liberty to take necessary steps to seek eviction of the petitioners by following due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall also stand closed. ____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J Dated: 16.12.2015 Ssv