Chairman And Hsg Commissioner, Hyd And ANR v. Smt. Y.V. Sudharani, Hyd And 2 Ot

[ 33s31 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT APPEAL NO: 103 OF 201 3 writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters patent Appeal against the order dated 25.09.2012 passed in W.P. No. 8825 ot 2007 on the file of the High Court. Between:

1. Andhra Pradesh Housing Qqqr{, ngpgy. its Vice Chairman and Housing Commissioner, Gruhakalpa, M.J.Road.'Hvberabad 2 The Executive Engine6r (Hg),, Western Division, Ap Housing Board, Hyderabad ...AppELLANTsrREspoNDENTs 2 & 3 AND

1. pp.t,_Y.V, Sudharani, Wo Giridhamath C/o M.Sudhakar,MlG, FlatNo.2l2 KPHB colony lll Phase' Hyderabad ..REspoNDENT/pETrroNER

2. gtite of Telangana,-Rep. by its Secretary, Housing Department, Telangana SeCretariat,'Hyd-erabad.

3. J.Mohan Krishna, S/o Siva Prasad r/o 42, MlG, Tth phase, KpHB Hyderabad C.T. is amended as per Court Order datd 02.01 .2024 in l.A.No.3 ot 2014 (WAMP No.4042 of 2014) ...RESPONDENTS l.A. NO: 2OF 2013 P. NO: 233 OF 2013) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay operation of the order dt.25.09.2012 passed in W.p. No. 8828 of 2007, pending disposal of W.A. No.

12012 l.A. NO: 3 OF 2013(WAMP. NO: 866 OF 20't3t Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to

receive the copy of the sare deed dt. 17 .11.2007 executed by the A.p. Housing Board in favour of Respondent No.3 herein, on record in W.A.No.103/2013 Counset for the Appellants: SRt J PRABHAKAR, SENTOR COUNSEL Counsel for Respondent No. 1: SMT. K SWARNA SESHU Counsel for Respondent No. 2: Gp FOR HOUSING Counsel for Respondent No. 3: SRI p. SRI RAM The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

'- ,'/ THE HON'BLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE ALOKARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SHRIJUSTICE ANIL KUMARJUKANTI WRIT APPEAL No.103 of 2013 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble the ChiefJustice Atok Aradhe) Mr. J. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appears for the appellants Mr. P. Sri Ram, learned counsel appears for respondent No.3.

2. This intra court appeal is hled against the order dated 25.09.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge by which Writ Petition No.8825 of 2007 preferred by respondent No.l has been allowed and the order dated 24.06.2006 passed by appellant No.2 has been set aside.

3.

Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that sometime in the year 1994, a notification was issued by the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') inviting applications for allotment of LIG Houses. Respondent No.l on 11.11.1994 submitted an application seeking allotment of a house. On 05.06.1995, the Board informed respondent No.l about the schedule of

_) CJ &JAK, J w A.No.lO3 ol20l3 payment. On 28.11.1996, by draw of lots, House No.545 in Phase VII situate at KPHB Colony, Hyderabad, was allotted to respondent No. l. However, the balance consideration amount was not paid by respondent No.l .

4.

Thereupon, the Board issued a notice dated 20.08.2001 to respondent No. I asking her to make payment of the balance sale consideration and execute the agreement and if she does not execute the agreement within one month, the allotment made in her favour shall be cancelled. Thereafter, another notice dated 17.05.2004 was issued to respondent No.1 which was received back with the endorsement that the addressee has left without instructions.

5.

Thereupon, a notice dated 26.01.2006 was published in the newspaper stating that respondent No.l has neither taken possession nor has executed the agreement. Thereafter, ln response to the aforesaid notice, one Narayana Rao paid the balance sale consideration on 30.01.2006. Thereafter, by a communication dated 15.02.2006, respondent No.l was asked to pay the publication charges and to execute the agreement of I

CJ & JAK. J rv-A.No.l03 of 20 ll sale. Thereafter, on 24.06.2006, the allotment executed in favour ofrespondent No. I was cancelled.

6.

The Board on 04.08.2006 issued a fresh notification in the newspapers for auction of the subject house. The auction was held on 22.08.2006 in which respondent No.3 in this appeal participated and was declared as the successful bidder and the allottee. The order of allotment was issued in his favour on 02.03.2007.

7.

Thereafter, respondent No. I filed a Writ petition on 23.04.2007 i.e., after a period of one year from the date of cancellation of the allotment executed in her favour. The learned Single Judge by an order dated 25.09.2012 quashed the order of cancellation of allotment dated 24.06.2006 and directed the Board to complete the formalities for execution of the agreement and to handover the possession of the subject house to respondent No.1.

8.

The aforesaid order is challenged in this appeal. 9.

Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submitted that prior to the filing of the Writ Petition, an auction was held on which respondent No.3 in this 22.08.2006 ln appeal was I

C.J & JAK, J W.A.No lO3 of2013 declared to be a successful bidder and subsequently, an order of allotment has been issued in favour of respondent No.3 on 02.03.2007.It is further submitted that neither the notification dated 04.08.2006 nor the order of allotment executed in favour of respondent No.3 was challenged in the Writ Petition. Therefore, no relief could have been granted to respondent No.1.

10. Leamed counsel for respondent No.3 has supported the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants.

I l. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record.

12. Admittedly, after cancellation of the allotment made in favour of respondent No. l, an auction was held on 22.08.2006 in which respondent No.3 was declared to be the highest bidder. Thereupon, by an order dated 02.03.2007 allotment of the subject house was made in favour of respondent No.3. Neither the aforesaid auction nor the allotment dated 02.03.2007 was challenged by respondent No.l in the Writ Petition which was filed subsequently on 23.04.2007.

CJ & JAK, J W.A.No.l03 ot 20t3 Tlrerefore, in the absence of challenge to the auction notification and the subsequent allotment ln favour of respondent No.3, no relief in favour ofrespondent No. I could have been granted in the Writ petition.

13. For the aforementioned reasons, the order dated 25.09.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ petition No.8825 of 2007 is ser aside.

14.

In the result, the Writ Appeal is allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/- K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The Vice Chairman and Housing Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, Gruhakalpa, M.J,Road, Hyderabad The Executive Engineer (Hg),, Western Division, AP Housing Board, Hyderabad The Secretary, Housing Department, State of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad.

One CC to Sri J Prabhakar Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri P Sri Ram Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Smt. K Swarna Seshu Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP For Housing, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Copies 8.

MBC t In t

HIGH COURT DATED: 0210112024 1t\q STATA q l o 12 l[\ 2$2[ C) * * tli: t1!, I i'

'

ORDER

WA.No.103 of 2013 ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL $ WITHOUT COSTS \ lA \r