IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH • (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 392 OF AMARAVATI Between; 1. Dr. Narasimha Patrudu Makena, S/o. (Late) M.V.A.N Patrudu, Represented by his Special Power of Attorney holder, Makena Bennayya Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N.Patrudu, aged about 70 yrs, residing at 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam 2. Sunandini Makena, W/o. Dr. NarasimhaPatrudu Makena, Represented by her Special Power of Attorney Holder, Makena Sujatha, W/o M Narasimha Acharyula Patrudu, aged about 62 years, R/o D.No.50-53-15, N.E. layout, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam-530013 3. Makena Bennayya Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N.Patrudu, aged about 70 yrs, residing at 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam 4. Makena Radhika, W/o. Dr. Makena BennayyaPatrudu, Aged about 64 years, R/o 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam-530 003 Andhra Pradesh 5. Makena Narasimha Acharyula Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N Patrudu, Aged about 66 years, residing at D.No.50-53-15, N.E. Layout, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam-530013 6. Makena Sujatha, W/o Makena Narasimha AcharyulaPatrudu, aged about 62 years, R/o D.No.50-53-15, N.E. layout, Seetharamadhara, Visakhapatnam-530013. 7. Makena Harshada, D/o Sri M Bennayya Patrudu, Represented by his Special Power of Attorney Holder. Makena BennayyaPatmdu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N.Patmdu, aged about ilJsiding at 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam 8. Makena Rohit Raj Patrudu, S/o M Narasimha Acharyula Patrudu, Represented by his Special Power of Attorney holder, Makena Narasimha Acharyula Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri M.V.A.N Patrudu, Aged about 76 years R/o D. No. 50-53-15, North Extension, T.P.T Colony, ’ Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam- 530013 9. Makena Shalini Patrudu, W/o. Bethina Jitendra Kiran Represented by her Special Power, of Attorney Holder Makena Radhika, W/o. Dr. Makena BennayyaPatrudu Aged about 64 years, R/o 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402. WestBlock Red Creek Apartments. Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station Pandurangapuram Visakhapatnam-530 003 Andhra Pradesh 10. Makena Rushita, D/o Makena Narasimha AcharyulaPatrudu Aged about 28 yrs, R/o D.No.50-53-15, N.E. Layout, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam-530013 11 Navraj Patrudu Makena, S/o Dr. M Narasimha Patmdu, Represented by his Special Power of Attorney Holder Makena Bennayya Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N.Patrudu, aged about 70 yrs, residing at 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam 70 yrs, 5 12. Rajeswari Makena, D/o Narasimha Patrudu Makena, Represented by her Special Power of Attorney Holder Makena Bennayya Patrudu, S/o. (Late) Sri. M.V.A.N.Patrudu, aged about 70 yrs, residing at 7-8-15/9, Flat No.402, West Block, Red Creek Apartments, Harbour Park Road, Near All India Radio Station, Pandurangapuram, Visakhapatnam. 13. M/s Pavanputra Health Edu. Services LLP Having its office at D.No. 50-95-2/12, North Extension, Seethammadhara, Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its authorized Director, Makena Sujatha, W/o Makena Narasimha AcharyuluPatrudu, R/o 50-53-15, North Extension, Seethammadhara, Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh 14. M/s Parsraj Rapahah Hospital LLP., Having its registered office at NRI Plot No. 1, North Extension, Seethammadhara, Vishakhapatnam Represented by its Director, Sri Parasuram Pothina. 15. M/s Vinaygar Promoters and Builders, Having its office at D.No. 10-1-38/B, IV Floor, Vinaygar Paradise, Waltair Uplands, Vishakhapatnam - 530003 Represented by its Managing Partner, Kiran Kumar Lagadapati, S/o L. Dasaratha Ramaiah ...Petitioners And: 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Velagapudi Amaravati 2. The Vishakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority (VMRDA), Vishakhapatnam Represented by its Metropolitan Commissioner 3. The Greater Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Vishakhapatnam (GVMC) Represented by its Commissioner ...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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the Proceedings vide Re. No. 15023/02/2024 Admn dated 19.12.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2 thereby keeping the Proceedings vide Plot No.l/SDNE/F dated 22.02.2020 under abeyance in perpetuity and further action of the Respondent No.2 in issuing Notice vide Re No. 684/81/DI/EM-1 dated NIL. 12.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the AP Metropolitan Region Urban Development Act 2015, Greater Vishakhapatnam Act besides being violative of Articles 14, 19(l)g, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same by upholding the legality of the Proceedings vide Plot No.l/SDNE/F dated 22.02.2020 issued by the Secretary, VMRDA. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Proceedings vide Rc. No. 15023/02/2024 Admn dated 19.12.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notice vide Rc No. 684/81/DI/EM-1 dated NIL .12.2024 issued by the Respondent No.2 herein. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI V SURYA KIRAN KUMAR (SC FOR VMRDA AND MUDA) Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010003422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 392/2025 Between; ...PETITIONER(S) Dr. Narasimha Patrudu Makena, and Others AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1.CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1 .GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV 2. V SURYA KIRAN KUMAR (SC FOR VMRDA and MUDA) 3. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: “...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the Proceedings vide Rc. No. 15023/02/2024 Admn dated 19.12.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 2 thereby keeping the Proceedings vide Plot No. 1/SDNE/F dated 22.02.2020 under abeyance in perpetuity and further action of the Respondent No. 2 in issuing Notice vide Rc.No.684/81/DI/EM-1 dated NIL. 12.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, without jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the AP Metropolitan Region Urban Development Act, 2015, Greater Vishakhapatnam Act besides being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)g, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same by upholding the legality of the Proceedings vide Plot No. 1/SDNE/F dated 22.02.2020 issued by the Secretary, VMRDA..” Petitioner No.1 herein is represented by petitioner No.3, Special Power of Attorney Holder. Petitioner No.2 herein is represented by petitioner No.6, Special Power of Attorney Holder. The brief facts of the writ petition are that the petitioner and his family members, few of whom were the non-residents of India, have floated a private limited company - M/S Raajevan Hospitals, Private Limited, a company registered under Companies Act, 1956 with registration No.7710 of 87-88 dated 21.08.1987 for the purpose of providing the medical care services. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh to attract the investments in the State of Andhra Pradesh and to promote the infrastructure development and accessible services to the citizens of the State, has contemplated a scheme known as “Andhra Pradesh Non-Resident 2. 3 Indian Investment Corporation Limited (ANRICH)”, wherein assistance shall be provided to the Non Residents of India for the establishment of Hospital/Nursing Home/Poly Clinics. In pursuance of which Chairman of the Urban Development Authority, Visakhapatnam, constituted vide G.O.Ms.No.482 M.A. dated 17.06.1978 under Section 3 of the A.P. Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975 (now merged and reconstituted Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority) has passed an order vide Rc.No.684/81/AllotmentA/UDA/D1 dated 01.04.1986 contemplating the conditions of allotment and use of the subject property, wherein it recites that the rate of Rs.200/- per square yards is determined and total cost of the subject property is computed at the rate of Rs.9,08,000/-. the Vice as 3. The case of the petitioner is that the conditions contemplated in the registered sale deed dated 04.04.1988 are similar to or pari in material to the conditions contemplated in the order of the Vice Chairman, VUDA wherein it provides, among the other conditions, that the subject property conveyed in favour of the company shall not be sub-divided and shall not be used for other purpose and the construction of the nursing home shall be concluded within 2 years from the date of the allotment. Further, the company shall not sell the property for a period of 15 years from the date of completion of construction of the building on the site. While the matter being so, in the month of October, 2004, the Rajveevan Hospitals Pvt. Ltd., has requested the Vice Chairman, VUDA to issue “No Objection Certificate” for leasing a portion of the building in the general nursing home constructecUn the subject property any 4 in favour of an educational institution on the ground that the bar/restriction to r convey the subject property within 15 years from the date of agreement has been lifted by efflux of time by referring to the clauses in the sale deed dated 04.04.1998 and also stated that the company has halted the operatiosn in the general nursing home in the light of the unpredicted losses incurred to them. Since there was no response from VUDA, Visakhapatnam, the petitioners executed a lease deed dated 15.04.2006 in favour of the Prakash Educational Society, conveying the Building consisting of Ground Floor and First Floor in an extent of 2300 Sq.Yards in the subject property for a period of 10 years commencing from 01.05.2005. Thereafter, respondent No.2 issued show cause notice vide R.Dis.No.684/B1/D1 .FI dated 17.11.2005 alleging that the allottee has failed to develop the entire subject property for the purpose of Nursing Home and further has failed to provide better medical services to public and has let out the part of the site to the educational institution contrary to the allotment conditions, in pursuance of which the petitioners has again submitted letter dated 04.12.2008 duly requesting for issuance of “No objection” for leasing out certain portion of the subject property in favour of the educational institution, and in pursuance of which, No objection was issued by respondent No.2. Thereafter, petitioner No.15 has obtained permission through APDPMS on line portal for construction of 2 cellars for parking. Ground, first floor for commercial and 2nd to 15th floor for residential flats and the same was confirmed on 06.06.2024. 4- While the matter being Visakhapatnam (North) vide has withdrawn the NOC i any prior notice calling for so, basing on the complaint raised by MLA, proceedings dated 19.12.2024 respondent No.2 Secretary, without giving petitioners. Thereafter, -1 dated 24.12.2024 has issued the petitioners for vioiating the conditions in year 1998, within 7 days from issued earlier by the then an explanation from the respondent No.2 vide Rc.No.684/81/D1/EM notice caiiing for explanation from the sale deed which date of receipt of the notice. was registered in the the 5. By the impugned Certificate (NOC) issued by Region Development Authority hospital purpose to proceedings dated 19.12.2024, the then Secretary, Visakhapatnam the No Objection Metropolitan , permitting conversion/change of land use from residential/commercial purpose and to transfer the that the property to the developer permissions/approvals to be obtained subject to condition necessary competent authority, was opportunity of hearing to from the Withdrawn, without giving any notice and affording the petitioners. 6. It is the case of the petitioners that was provided to the 19.12.2024 and hence. no notice was issued nor an petitioners before issuing the there is violation of opportunity of hearing impugned proceedings dated principles of natural justice. 7. During the course of 06.01.2025 is placed on record hearing, a copy of the show whereby the GPA holder -cause notice dated of M/s Vinayagar 6 Promoters and Builders was called upon to show cause as to why the building plans in respect of the subject property shall not be cancelled/revoked, within 7 days from the date of receipt of notice. A perusal of the impugned proceedings dated 19.12.2024 would show that the same is not preceded by any show cause notice. The impugned proceedings would merely reflect that the Joint Commissioner, VMRDA, has submitted a report stating that there has been violation of procedure in the issuance of NOC by the then Secretary. Basing on the said report, the NOC issued earlier by the then Secretary was withdrawn/kept aside and thereafter, respondent No.2 issued notice dated 24.12.2024 calling for explanation from the petitioners for violating the conditions in the sale deed, which was registered in the year 1998, which in fact ought to have been issued prior to 8. / \ / / withdrawing the NOC. Thus, it is apparent that no notice whatsoever was issued nor an opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to the concerned before issuing the impugned proceedings. Thus, it is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice and the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained on that ground alone and are liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dated 19.12.2024, withdrawing the NOC granted to the petitioners earlier and the consequential show-cause 10. dated 24.12.2024 and as well as notice dated 06.01.2025 issued under Section 450 of APMC Act, 1955 to the petitioner No. 15, are hereby set aside 1 and the respondents are at liberty to initiate further course of action by duly issuing notice to the petitioners and by providing following due process of law. opportunity of hearing an 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. However, the respondents at liberty to initiate action in accordance with law if at all they found any illegality in issuing NOC in favour of the petitioners. No order as to costs. are 12. Consequently miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Development Department Andhra Secretariat Velagapudi Amaravati 2. The Metropolitan Commissioner, Vishakhapatnam Metropolitan Region De''elopment Authority (VMRDA), Vishakhapatnam 4. One CC to SRI CKR ASSOCIATES, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6. One CC to SRI V. SURYA KIRAN KUMAR MUDA), Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRI A.S.C. AP), Advocate [OPUC] 8. Three C.D. Copies Pradesh URBAN DEVELOPMENT, (SC FOR VMRDA AND BOSE, (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS nm tim » HIGH COURT DATED:08/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.392 of 2025 $ 12 MAY 3* ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS