APHC010209832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Mm SATURDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 10914 OF 2025 Between: 1. Datia Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Raju S/o Datia Veera Narasimha Raju, DR No. 1-54/5, Flat No-2, Surya Enclave, Opp VUDA colony LIG Qrt, North Extension, Seethammadhara, Vishakhapatnam, 2. P. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o P. Appala Raju, H.No. 48-1-32/3, Srinagar Colony,Opp Reddy Hospital, Srinagar Colony Ward No. 28,Vishakapatnam, 3. Chebolu Nageswara Rao, S/o Chebolu Rama Rao, DR No. 1-57-6/39, Plot No-301, Venkojipalem, Nikhils Paradise MVIP Sector-1, LB Colony, Visakhapatnam 4. Suhail Ahmed Khan S/o Rabi Ahmed Khan, DR No. 30-11-1, Lakshmi Street, Opp Pen-school, Dabagardens, Vishakapatnam, 5. Habibullah Aarif S/o Shaik Thaher Saheb(Late), DR No. 7-1-43, Flat No. 502, Kirlampudi layout, Chinna Waltair Aarifs vinaighar East Avenue, Vishakhapatnam, 6. Raidi Lavanya W/o Rayidi Appale Suri, DR No. 16-166, Yathaveedhi, pathagopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam 7. Botta Venkata Gowripathi Rao, S/o Botta Appa Rao(Late) Railway New Colony, Akkayapalem, Visakhapatnam, 8. Alla Dhana Lakshmi W/o Alla Ramesh Kumar, DR No. 7-5-78, Pandu Rangapuram, Visakhapatnam, ) A ^ :9. Vinna Kota Samba Siva Rao, S/o Vinna Kotta Ch Rama murthy, H No. . i / 47-15-147/15, Rajajimarg, Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam, M/s Sangam Enterprises, Rep by Kotu mahindra, S/o Pattabi Rama Reddy, H No. 9-14-1, Balaji Nagar, Visakhapatnam, Rokkam Rama Chandra Rao, S/o Rokkam Rama Nadham, DR No. 47-15-12, 1st Lane, Dwarakanagar Near RTC complex, Visakhapatnam, Nuruddin Topiwala, S/o Kadherbhai Topiwala, BaituI farhat, Balaji Nagar, Siripuram Junction, Visakhapatnam - ■ i 4. ao. 11. 12. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Velagapudi, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director of Town and Country Planning, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 3. The Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, 4. The Town Surveyor Zone II, Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Visakhapatnam ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not issuing 1 :1 additional TDR in addition to the earlier TDR issued 1:1 under BRTS scheme in lieu of the petitioners land got affected in the road widening of Asilametta Junction to Maddillapalem and Railway Station to Dwarakanagar under BRTS scheme in spite of memo No.12310/HT/2014 dt.20.07.2016 ^ issued by the 1st respondent for double TDR having acquired the petitioners land by virtue of registered gift deeds dt.03.07.2019 is as illegal. Arbitrary, highhanded, parity and contrary to Section 146 and 147 of A.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 and also violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to issue TDR certificates at 1:1 ratio in addition to the earlier 1 :1 TDR certificates under the BRTS scheme as permitted under Memo No.12310/HT/2014 dt.20.07.2016 and the endorsement dt.04.02.2020 pursuant to the letter dt.25.03.2022 addressed by the 3rd respondent and the survey report dt.07.01.2020 duly considering the applications dt.06.03.2019 made by the petitioners and the double TDR certificates as issued to the other owners in the vicinity under the scheme of BRTS by setting aside the endorsement dt.03.09.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent. lA NO; 1 OF 2025 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 direct the respondents to issue TDR certificates at 1:1 ratio in addition to the earlier 1:1 TDR certificates under the BRTS scheme as permitted under Memo NO.12310/HT/2014 dt.20.07.2016 and the endorsement dt.04.02.2020 pursuant to the letter dt.25.03.2022 addressed by the 3^^ respondent and the survey report dt.07.01.2020 duly considering the applications dt.06.03.2019 made by the petitioners and the double TDR certificates as issued to the other owners in the vicinity under the scheme of BRTS bv setting aside the endorsement dt.03.09.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent. • A? : SRI S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY Nos.1 & 2:GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND Counsel for the Petitioners Counsel for the Respondent URBAN DEV AP Counsel for the MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) I Respondent Nos.3 & 4: SRI A S C BOSE (SC FOR The Court made the following order: ^ APHC010209832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI {Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 109^4/2025 [3457] 0^ Between; 1. DATLA VEERA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA RAJU, S/0 DATLA VEERA NARASIMHA RAJU, DR NO. 1-54/5, FLAT NO-2, SURYA ENCLAVE, OPP VUDA COLONY LIG QRT, NORTH EXTENSION SEETHAMMADHARA, VISHAKHAPATNAM, 2 P SATYANARAYANA RAJU, S/O P. APPALA RAJU, H.NO. 48-1- 32/3, SRINAGAR COLONY, OPP REDDY HOSPITAL, SRINAGAR COLONY WARD NO. 28,VISHAKAPATNAM 3 CHEBOLU NAGESWARA RAO, S/O CHEBOLU RAMA RAO, DR NO. 1 -57-6/39, PLOT NO-301, VENKOJIPALEM, NIKHILS PARADISE MVIP SECTOR-1, LB COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. SUHAIL AHMED KHAN, S/O RABI AHMED KHAN, DR NO. 30-11-1, LAKSHMI STREET, OPP PEN-SCHOOL, VISHAKAPATNAM, 5 HABIBULLAH AARIF, S/O SHAIK THAHER SAHEB(LATE), DR NO. 7-1-43, FLAT NO. 502, KIRLAMPUDI LAYOUT, CHINNA WALTAIR AARIFS VINAIGHAR EAST AVENUE, VISHAKHAPATNAM, 6 RAIDI LAVANYA, W/0 RAYIDI APPALE SURI, DR NO. 16-166, YATHAVEEDHI, PATHAGOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 7. BOTTA VENKATA GOWRIPATHI RAO RAO(LATE) VISAKHAPATNAM, 8. ALLA DHANA LAKSHMI, W/0 ALLA RAMESH KUMAR, DR NO. 7-5- 78, PANDU RANGAPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, 9 VINNA KOTA SAMBA SIVA RAO,, S/O VINNA KOTTA CH RAMA MURTHY, H NO. 47-15-147/15, RAJAJIMARG, DWARAKANAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM, 10.M/S SANGAM ENTERPRISES,, REP BY KOTU MAHINDRA PATTABI RAMA REDDY, H NO. 9-14-1, BALAJI NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM. 11.ROKKAM RAMA CHANDRA RAO,, S/O ROKKAM RAMA NADHAM, DR NO. 47-15-12, 1ST LANE, DWARAKANAGAR NEAR RTC COMPLEX. VISAKHAPATNAM, 12 NURUDDIN TOPIWALA,, S/O KADHERBHAI TOPIWALA, BAITUI BALAJI NAGAR, SIRIPURAM JUNCTION, DABAGARDENS, S/O BOTTA APPA RAILWAY NEW COLONY, AKKAYAPALEM, S/O FARHAT, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER(S) 2 AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN SECRETARY, DEVELOPMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM, 4.THE TOWN SURVEYOR ZONE II, GREATER VISHAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEVAP The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 10914/2025 m ORDER: The petitioners are aggrieved by the denial of TDR bonds in accordance with the Memo No.12310/H2/2014, dated 20.07,2016 all the petitioners have executed registered gift deeds for the affected portion of land belonging to the petitioners when the respondent authorities proposed road widening from Junction to Maddilapalem and Railway Station to Dwarakanagar Asilametta under BRTS Scheme. that several residents who were residing on the affected It is submitted of land which was abutting the main road were granted TDR in with the Memo dated 20.07.2016. However, the petitioners were 2. area accordance best known to the respondent not extended the said benefit for the reasons authorities. The petitioners were granted TDR bonds at the ratio 1:1. It is also dated 20.07.2016 submitted that the 1^'‘respondent has issued memo had communicated with the 3^^ respondent that whereby the 1®* respondent examined the proposal and decided to allow the double the Government had Transferrable Development Right certificates (TDR) 1:2 ratio to all the owners properties procured for formation of BRTS Corridor, GVMC limits prior of G.O.Ms.No.168, dated 07.04.2012 also as a special case, entitled for the benefit which was also submitted that the TDR of the to the issue It is submitted that the petitioners are passed on to similarly placed individuals. It i bonds issued to some of the respondents were also filed along with the pleadings as annexure to the writ petition in all the TDR bonds issued there is 3. IS 4 a mention with regard to the applicability of the Government Memo dated 20.07.2016. The petitioners submitted a representation for their cases for grant of TDR bonds in pursuance of the Memo dated 20.07.2016. The 3'"' respondent vide proceedings dated 25.03.2022 corresponded with the 1 f respondent and recommended issuance of TDR bonds in pursuance of Memo dated 20.07.2016. The 1®' respondent was also informed about 14 other St affected individuals who were granted TDR bonds in pursuance of the memo dated 20.07.2016. 4. It is also submitted that vide endorsement dated 30.09.2021 the Assistant City Planner, Zone-Ill, GVMC, had rejected the request of the petitioners for grant of double TDR bonds which was subsequently rectified vide proceedings dated 25.03.2022. It is submitted that though the 3"'^ respondent had issued the appropriate communication to the 1®‘ respondent t duly following the memo dated 20.07.2016 the petitioners are denied the double TDR bonds which they are entitled for. The 1®^ respondent has filed a counter and stated that the petitioners were awarded TDR in the ratio of 1:1 in the year 2010-11 as per the existing G.O.Ms.No.678, dated 07.09.2007. It is stated that the petitioners representation was also rejected vide memo dated 27.11.2024 holding that the petitioners are not entitled for TDR bonds at the ratio of 1 ;2. 5. 6. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that they have recommended for issuance of TDR bonds at the ratio of 1:2 as 14 other TDR bonds duly considering the memo individuals were granted 2016 issued by the 1“ respondent affected dated 20.07. learned Standing , the Assistant Government Pleader learned counsel for the petitioners 3rd respondent and the learned Heard the 7. Counsel for the for the respondent Nos.1,2 and 4. land was affected during the dispute that the petitioners It is not in of the road for facilitating 14 other affected individuals were 8. the BRTS scheme. It is also not in dispute widening that the G.O.Ms.No.168 NO.12310/H2/2014, dated 20.07.2016, Insofar as concerned. It is not in dispute that the petitioners by the 3^'^ respondent. issued TDR bonds in pursuance of Government memo and also the dated 07.04.2012 the claims of the petitioners had also executed gift are deeds as called upon 9. On perusal of the 'pleadings and after hearing the arguments it is also the same platform Srd respondent has issued dated 20.07.2016 in with regard to applicability dated 20.07.2016 insofar as the G.O.Ms.No.678 is made in respondent to consider as are placed on individuals for whom the not in dispute that the petitioners compared to the 14 other TDR bonds duly implementing the Government memo the counter also does not whisper letter and spirit. The non-applicability of the Government Memo or reference to impediment for the with the 14 ither individuals for whom the concerned though a petitioners are the counter. There could be no of the petitioners on par extended at the ratio of 1:2 the case TDR bonds were 6 10. On these considerations, this Court is of the considered view that the ' petitioners are certainly entitled for TDR at the ratio of 1:2 in pursuance of the Government memo No.12310/H2/2014 dated 20.07.2016. Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the respondents to issue TDR bonds to the petitioners in pursuance of the Government memo dated 20.07.2016 other individuals who have been granted TDR bonds of the G.O.Ms.No.168 dated 07.04.2012 and also Government 20.07.2016. on par with the 14 duly taking into account memo dated 11. With these observations, this writ petition is allowed. At any rate the respondent authorities shall issue the TDR bonds to the petitioners after verification of their claims of executing the gift deeds within weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. a period of eight (08) 12. Sd/- M. SRINMV.4S ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director of Town and Country Planning, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 3. The Commissioner, Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam, 4. The Town Surveyor Zone II, Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation Visakhapatnam 5. One CC to Sri. S Lakshminarayana Reddy, Advocate [OPUC 6. One CC to Sri. A S C Bose (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV, High Court of Andhra Pradesh[OUT]. 8. Two CD Copies. AL vkS. •. TL HIGH COURT DATED:30/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 10914 OF 2025 17 SEP 2n?*l C9. ^ . Curren; i>ection ^'5 ^^a£gSl>ATC»j33^^ ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS