APHC010093632023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 4705/2023 Between: M/s. Sri Satya Sai Hanuman Enterprises ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RAJANNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K.MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR GVMC) 2. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.4705 of 2023 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the inaction of respondents in considering the petitioner’s representation for grant of TDR (Transferable Development Rights) in their favour in lieu of executing Gift deeds in favour of respondent No.2 while granting approvals of layout plan for the land located in Sy.Nos.90/2P, 99/1p, 2P, 101/3, 101/4A, 101/4B, 101/4C, of Madhurawada Village, vide registered gift deed No.2290/2002 dated 21.03.2020 even though similarly situated persons were already granted TDR in respect of their layouts. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm and a partnership deed was executed on 09.12.2006. The said firm consists of 14 members and the duty of the firm was: i. To carryon the business in purchase, development and sale of lands plots etc., ii. Development of residential layouts of all kinds iii. Construction and sale of group houses, apartments and commercial complexes iv. Consultancy and other services for the purposes of layouts of lands, plots etc., v. Execution of works contracts of any nature. 3. The petitioners by acquiring an extent of Ac.3.66 cents of vacant land in Survey numbers mentioned above, got patta No.495 in Madhurawada Village under 3 registered sale deeds i.e., i. Document No.2354/2007 dated 25.05.2007 for an extent of Ac.0.22 cents; ii. Document No.2896/2007 dated 05.06.2007 for an extent of Ac.1.44 cents; iii. Document No.2477/2007 dated 05.06.2007 for an extent of Ac.2.00cents. 4. A layout plan was prepared by the petitioner and the same was stated to have been approved for the land covered under the above documents. Respondent No.2 called upon the petitioners to execute gift settlement deed as required under Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, 2017, and accordingly, a gift settlement deed was executed in favour of respondent No.2 vide document No.2290/2020 dated 21.03.2020 giving an extent of Ac.1.29 cents. The petitioner submits that the Government had taken a decision to grant TDRs with certain percentage of land which was applied for sanction of layout in case they part existing land is affected due to road widening or for any public purpose. The petitioner referred to TDRs to certain individuals who were said to be similarly placed as that of the petitioner. In that context, the petitioners have submitted a plan for sanction of TDR along with their layout plan on 10.02.2022 and again on 21.01.2023. In that view, as the petitioners plan is not being considered, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent Corporation submits that there is no dispute regarding execution of gift deed by the Petitioner, but it is stated that the Government vide memo No.2250050/M2/2023 dated 30.10.2023 constituted a Scrutiny Committee for issuance of TDRs to the persons whose sites are affected in the master plan roads by duly verifying the sale transactions so far made on the subject property. The proposal for issuance of TDR in favour of the Petitioner was also placed before the said Scrutiny Committee and the Petitioner will be granted TDR soon after approval by the Scrutiny Committee. 6. Heard Sri K.Rajanna, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for GVMC and learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration Urban Development for Respondents. 7. 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: 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. 8. As per the above extracted Rule, the officials named above as regards Urban Development Authorities 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. As the gift deed was executed nearly five years ago by the Petitioner, i.e. on 21.03.2020, it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following direction: “(i) Respondent No.2 is directed to place the file of the Petitioner before the Scrutiny Committee forthwith; (ii) 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. (iii) No order as to costs.” 9 . With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date:21.04.2025 RKS