Smt. Maddela Geeta Rani v. The State Of Telangana, And 4 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.18284 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Sampath Prabhakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 4.

2.

According to petitioner, layout permission was granted for lands in Sy.Nos 29, 30, 31, 36, 37, 67 and 68/P of Nagole Village. Petitioner purchased plot No.78 admeasuring 200 square yards in Sy.Nos 29, 30, 31, 36, 37, 67 and 68/P of A.R.Enclave, situated at Block No.1, Venkatramana Colony, Nagole Village, Uppal Mandal under registered sale deed dated 07-07-2001. Petitioner contends that since her plot was forming part of unapproved layout, she applied for regularization of plot and her plot was regularized on 26-08-2016. Petitioner now alleges that there was another layout application made and provisional sanction was granted on 24/25.01.2019. According to petitioner, when she went to her site, she found that her house plot now shown as open area in the layout for which tentative sanction was accorded on 24/25.01.2019 and the same is illegal. Petitioner, therefore, prays to direct the respondents not to release the final layout by including the plot of the petitioner.

3.

The facts on record are not clear as to what is exactly her grievance. According to petitioner, there was layout earlier formed in which she purchased plot and her plot was regularized. Once layout was already formed and her plot was regularized, petitioner is unable to explain as to how forming of another layout

subsequently is affecting her and whether this layout is overlapping existing layout and her plot is now included in the new layout showing as open plot. In the absence of specific averment and supporting documents to show that there is change of layout earlier made overlapping existing lay out covering plot of the petitioner, matter cannot be considered and direction/declaration sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. It is open to the petitioner to apply to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (G.H.M.C.) with all supporting documents on her house plot and call upon G.H.M.C. to look into her grievance. It is also open to the petitioner to ask for conducting survey, if the same is permissible. If such application is made within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, G.H.M.C. shall consider her application within four weeks thereafter positively.

4. Thus, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out her remedies in the above manner and work out further grievance if any on the decision made by G.H.M.C., the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J 23-08-2019 Nvl