APHC010586212023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 30406/2023 Between: Smt. P. Suvedamma ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHALLA SIVASANKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed questioning inaction of respondent No.4 in taking further steps in pursuance of notice issued under Section 429 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 by notice vide Rc.No.G1/596 /2016 dated Nil.05.2022, in granting Transferable Development Rights (TDR) in respect of petitioner’s land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.12 cents in Sy.No.229/3D of Mamidelapadu village, Kurnool Urban Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. The husband of the petitioner late P.Aron was allotted land by the then Tahsildar vide proceedings in Rc.No.Dis.No.3068/82 dated 21.07.1982 (a) in an extent of Ac.0.52 cents in Sy.No.228/5 (b) an extent of Ac.0.42 cents in Sy.No.229/3D (c) an extent of Ac.1.68 cents in Sy.No.231/1J (d) an extent of Ac.1.46 cents in Sy.No.237/2 and an extent of Ac.0.47 cents in Sy.No.238/3 at Mamidelapadu Village fields, Kurnool Taluk, Kurnool District. 3. After the death of petitioner’s husband on 20.01.2002, the petitioner succeeded to the property referred above. Since then, the petitioner and his family members are in possession and enjoyment of the said property. While things stood thus, an extent of Ac.0.12 cents forming part of Ac.0.42 cents in S.No.229/3D of Mamidelapadu Village, Kurnool urban Mandal, Kurnool District, was acquired by respondent No.4 for the purpose of laying road, as per the master plan adopted by Kurnool Municipal Corporation. 3 4. Subsequently, the 4th respondent issued notice vide Rc.No.G1/596/ 2016 dated nil.05.2022 under Section 429 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955, informing that the land of the petitioner was acquired for laying master plan road in terms of G.O.Ms.No.119 dated 28.03.2017, and the petitioner would be allotted Transferable Development Rights (TDR) in the ratio of 1:4 and called upon the petitioner to submit relevant documents. Though the respondents received the documents from the petitioner, and inspite of her representation dated 29.08.2023, no action was taken for issuance of TDR in favour of petitioner. The petitioner pleads that notarized affidavit dated 31.08.2023 was also executed, as directed by the respondent authority. 5. Heard Sri Challa Siva Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing on behalf of respondents. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to TDR’s being issued to similarly situated persons, by following the judgment rendered in W.P.Nos.2431 and 5336 of 2023. Though the land was acquired long back, no TDR was issued in favour of the petitioner. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 7. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that as per G.O.Ms.No.169 dated 07.04.2012 a committee was constituted and the said committee would examine the claim of the petitioner. 4 8. Having heard the respective counsel, this Court opines as under: Chapter XII of the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules provides guidelines for issuance of TDRs. Subsequent to the institution of the writ petition, G.O.Ms.No.4, MAUD(M) Department, dated 09.01.2025 was issued by the State, bringing certain amendments to the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017. The Rule 169 (3) (a) which is relevant to the present case was amended as under: XIV. In Rule 169,- (1) for sub-rule (3), the following shall be substituted, namely,- "(3) (a) In case of ULBS, the Municipal Commissioner is competent to approve the Road Development Plan/Circulation Plan and to issue TDR as per Rules. (b)In case of UDAS, the Metropolitan Commissioner, /Commissioner/Vice Chairperson is the competent to approve the Road Development Plan/Circulation Plan and issue TDR. (c) The following committee shall scrutinize all aspects before issuance of TDR by meeting on a fortnightly basis the concern Town Planning Section Head shall notify the TDR proposal, before placing it in the committee, by way of paper notification to be given and within as stipulated period of 7 days, any claims and objections which may arise also to be placed before the committee. 1.The committee at ULB level will consist of the following officials: a) Municipal Commissioner concerned - Chairperson. b) RDDTP of concerned region. c) Addítional Commissioner, Revenue In-Charge. d) ULB town planning head - Convenor 2. The Committee at UDA's / MRDA will consist of the following officials: 5 a) Commissioner, CRDA / Metropolitan Commissioner, VMRDA / V.C. of the UDA - Chairperson. b) RDDTP of concerned region. c) Town planning head of the UDA concerned - convenor. 3.The above committees shall scrutinize all aspects before issuance of TDR. Before issuance of TDR the following aspects shall be mandatorily checked: Ownership of land. Extent of land affected. Whether it is required to issue TDR as per rules. Valuation of TDR. Any master plan issues Whether any other benefits were received earlier etc. After dealing with objections, if any received from the General Public only TDR's shall be issued duly verifying the draft gift deed." The said committee will take decision collectively either by conducting a meeting or through circulation of the file in online portal. The SLA period will be fixed separately for each member. The deemed provision shall be enabled in the Online portal. In case of the deemed approval, if it is found at later date that, the TDR is issued erroneously, the concerned will be held responsible and liable for disciplinary action. Further, if any of the Committee member rejects the proposal without proper justification and recording the reasons shall not be considered. The detailed guidelines governing these rules will be issued separately. 9. As per the above extracted Rule, the officials will scrutinize all aspects before issuing TDR by meeting fortnightly. However, no outer time limit was prescribed in the amended Rule for issuance of TDR. This Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition as follows: 6 “The Respondent No.4 is directed to place the file of the Petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee forthwith and the Scrutiny Committee shall examine the documents of the Petitioner and accordingly consider issuance of TDR within an outer time limit of four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 10. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 09.04.2025 KBN 7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 89 WRIT PETITION NO: 30406/2023 Date: 09.04.2025 KBN