1 APHC010058632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3324/2025 Between: STBL Projects Limited ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following: 2 ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring action of the 2nd respondent herein in not releasing the mortgaged plots Nos.108 to 118 and 139 to 150 (23 Nos.) in layout LP No.44/2015 dated 22.05.2015, covers an extent of Ac.9-32 cents situated in Sy.Nos.255P, 279P, 280P 285P of Bharanikam Village, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) 300A of the Constitution of India besides contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Metropolitan Region and Urban Development Authority Act, 2016 and Andhra Pradesh Land Development (Layout and Sub-division) Rules, 2017 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to release the mortgage plots Nos.108 to 118 & 139 to 150 (23 Nos.) in layout LP No.44/2015 dated 22.05.2015, covers an extent of Ac.9-32 cents situated in Sy.Nos.255P, 279P, 280P, 285P of Bharanikam Village, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District…...” 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: a) The petitioner company, after obtaining permission under the provisions of the A.P. Urban Areas Development Act, 1975, formed a layout in Bharanikam Village, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, covered by Layout Plan No.44 of 2015, dated 22.05.2015, in an extent of Ac.9.32 cents in Sy.Nos.255/4, 5, 6 & 7, 279/5 & 6, 280/2, 3, 5 & 7 and Sy.No.285/P of Bharanikam Village, Parawada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. The permission was granted by the Visakhapatnam Metropolitan Region Development Authority (VMRDA). b) A road was formed in Sy.No.314/1 and 314/3 of Bharanikam Village, Parawada Mandal, after resumption from the original assignees. It was a public road laid even before formation of layout by the petitioner company with 3 the funds of MGNREGS in pursuance of the resolution No.31 dated 20.11.2008 passed by the Bharanikam Grampanchayat. Previously, it travels from Parawada to Yelamanchili by connecting Lankelapalem and now passes through the layout. The said layout was sanctioned mainly on the ground that the said road was approved. The said layout was sanctioned mainly on the ground that the said road was approved. c) The District Collector, Visakhapatnam issued proceedings dated 04.02.2017, approving certain works on this road under the MNREGS scheme, including the construction of a "Pucca" cement concrete road. d) The Tahsildar, Parawada issued proceedings dated 16.09.2017, recommending to the District Collector, Visakhapatnam that the layout permissions granted to the petitioner company vide Layout Plan No.32 of 2009 and Layout Plan No.37 of 2011, be cancelled. These proceedings were unilateral, and no notice was issued to the petitioner company, nor was any opportunity given to the petitioner. Questioning the said action, the petitioner herein filed W.P.No.38762 of 2017, wherein this Court granted interim suspension and the said writ petition is still pending. Thereafter, the registrations are being allowed, and the houses are completed, and there are no restrictions for registration of the plots except the mortgaged property. e) The issues raised by the Tahsildar regarding assigned lands in adjacent survey fields, comprising other survey numbers, are no way related to the petitioner company. The layout was not formed in the Government land. 4 The public road existed prior to the formation of the layout and now it passes through it. The formation and development of a private layout on either side of an existing public road is not prohibited by law. f) The Tahsildar, Parawada Mandal issued proceedings dated 17.12.2018, addressed to the Vice Chairman, VUDA informing the stand of the revenue department, in the matter of formation of the said road in Bharanikam and Parawada Villages, inasmuch as a part of the said proposed road would traverse Government/Assigned land in Bharanikan and Parawada revenue villagers. This communication was much prior to the layout permission accorded to the petitioner company. g) The Complaint No.62/2010/B1 was lodged before the Hon’ble Lokayukta, regarding the formation of the road and a water body. The petitioner company was a party to the said proceedings. The Tahsildar, Parawada submitted a report dated 17.10.2012 in connection with this complaint and the complaint was subsequently closed by the Hon’ble Lokayukta. h) The communications dated 17.12.2008 and 17.10.2012 issued by the Tahsildar, Parawda Mandal would show that the road was permitted to be formed during the year 2008 itself. This was much prior to the formation of the layout by the petitioner company. The road now passes through the layout, which is used not only by the residents but also by citizens of Bharanikam, 5 Parawada and other villagers in the vicinity. The petitioner has submitted several representations for release of the mortgage of plots. i) The petitioner submitted representations on 28.4.2022 and 21.5.2022, to the 2nd respondent, having fulfilled the conditions stipulated for release of the mortgaged plots. Despite the layout being sanctioned in the year 2015 and the plots being developed with houses built on them, the failure to release the mortgaged plots has made it difficult to sell them. The petitioner has repeatedly sought action but has received no response. If the mortgaged plots are not released, the petitioner will face irreparable loss and hardship. The petitioner has not developed any layout on government land. The documents submitted along with the writ petition show that the road in Sy.Nos.314/1 and 314/3 is unconnected to the Layout Plan No.44/2015. j) In response to the petitioner’s representations, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter dated 02.09.2024, requesting the petitioner to furnish a copy of the gift deed concerning the handing over of roads and open spaces in the Layout. In pursuance of the said letter, all the documents as stipulated in the proceedings dated 02.09.2024 were submitted, but, despite the same the 2nd respondent herein has not released the mortgaged plots, Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development for respondent No.1 and Mr.V.Surya Kiran Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2. 6 4. On perusal of the affidavit, it is evident that the petitioner has submitted all the necessary documents to the 2nd respondent as per the order dated 02.09.2024. However, despite this, the mortgaged plots have not been released. The petitioner has made repeated requests, and the delay is causing significant hardship. 5. In view of the same, as the petitioner has already furnished documents as requested by the 2nd respondent vide office order dated 02.09.2024, the respondents are directed to consider the same for release of the mortgaged plots in accordance with law. The said process shall be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 12.02.2025 KGR