( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed by Mahesh Co-operative Housing society Limited, represented by its President sri. G. V. Ramakrishna Rao with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the order dated 2. 7. 2002 of Commissioner (Appeals)- 2nd respondent in proceedings no. Hyd/46 to 48/92 affirming the order of the Special Officer and Competent Authority, ulc, Hyderabad- 1st respondent dated 25. 8. 1990 as null and void. A further relief is sought for to direct the 1st respondent to consider the application in Form No. 5 dated 16. 9. 1976 in accordance with law and assign the land in Sy. No. 124 admeasuring Ac. 8-32 guntas of Lalaguda Village, Secunderabad to the petitioner-society under Section 23 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) act, 1976 read with G. O. Ms. No. 455, rev. (U. C. I.) Department, dated 29. 7. 2002 and G. O. Ms. No. 1069 Rev. (U. C. L) department, dated 7. 12. 2002.

( 2 ) AKNOOR Durgaiah, S/o Rajaiah, p. Mallaiah, S/o P. Pedaramaiah and t. Rajalingam, S/o Veeraiah of Lalaguda, secunderabad, are owners of the land bearing S. No. 124 admeasuring Ac. 9-20 guntas equivalent to 38,445. 20 square meters. Apart from the land bearing S. No. 124, they also owned lands bearing S. Nos. 130, 131, 159 and 160. They filed statements in Form 1 under Section 6 (1) of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ULC act) declaring the lands held by them. After due enquiry, draft statements under Section 8 (1) and notice under Section 8 (3) of ULC act came to be issued to the declarants determining the surplus area held by them. They filed objections to the draft statements. The Special Officer and Competent authority-1st respondent on considering the objections and on hearing the Counsel appearing on behalf of the declarants found them to be holding the land in excess over the ceiling limit. The extent of excess land held by each of the declarants is not required to be detailed for the disposal of this case. The declarants filed appeals before the commissioner (Appeals)-2nd respondent. Their appeals ended in dismissal. Pending finalization of the proceedings under ULC act, the declarants entered into agreements of sale with the petitioner-society. Indeed the petitioner-society sought for its impleadment as necessary party to the appeals preferred by the declarants. The appellate authority had taken note of the objections raised by the petitioner-society while disposing of the appeals filed by the declarants. I deem it appropriate to refer the relevant portion of the order passed by the appellate authority-2nd respondent and it is thus:". . . . In the meanwhile, Sri A. Durgaiah and others on behalf of the Maheswari Co-operative Housing Society has entered into an agreement with the declarants and later obtained an irrevocable Power of Attorney from the declarants for the land Ac. 8-32 guntas in S. No. 124 of Lalaguda (V) and requested to implead them as necessary parties to the Appeals Hyd/46 to 48/92 for defending their case. "

( 3 ) THE declarants/appellants as well as the petitioner-Society contended before the appellate authority that land in S. No. 124 of Lalaguda Village cannot be treated as vacant land within the meaning of ULC act. Their contention was negatived by the appellate authority. Para 3 of the order in appeals reads as follows:"3. The perusal of Collector, Hyderabad D. O. letter dated 28. 12. 1997 reveals that, sy. Nos. 124 and 123 of Lalaguda Village are popularly known as Errakunta since there was water body on the grounds, but the same are being converted into layout unauthorisedly. Hence, the lands in sy. No. 124 are not in the nature of non-vacant and the Competent Authority has correctly treated the lands as vacant and computed in the holding of the declarant. Hence, the plea raised is not tenable. "

( 4 ) THE controversy with regard to treating the land in S. No. 124 as vacant land is set at rest with the order dated 2. 7. 2002 passed by the appellate authority so far as the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document