P. S. MISHRA, C. J.

( 1 ) THE Commissioner, municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and additional Special Deputy Collector, Land acquisition Unit II, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, has preferred the instant appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters patent of the Court against the judgment of the learned single Judge in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of india. Petitioner-respondents have stated that they came to know in the year 1985 that a notification under Section3 (l) of the Andhra pradesh (Andhra Area) Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1956 (for short the Act") had been published in A. P. Gazette dated 17-2-1983 declaring an area of 9,000 square yards of ramaswamy Compound as slum area. They filed before this Court w. P. No. 8359 of 1985 challenging the said notification. The Court dismissed the writ petition on 6-8-1985 observing that the petitioner-respondents could challenge the notification after they received notice under section 3 (2) of the Act. They (petitioner- respondents), however, were served with the notice under Section 3 (2) of the Act in august, 1987. They appeared and they filed theirobjections both against the acquisition as well as declaration under Section 3 (1) of the Act. According to the petitioner- respondents enquiry in respect of the objections commenced, but reports, upon which the action was intended, had not been furnished to them and while the matter was still to be conclusively heard, the appellant had refused to furnish any such copies or even the information regarding the dates of inspection and contents of reports. They were informed that the enquiry was closed. They have stated as follows:"as a matter of fact there was no enquiry at all and as we originally submitted as early as on 30th August, 1987. We want to adduce oral and documentary evidence in support of our contentions and also place on record the other evidence to show that it is not a slum area within the meaning of section 3 (1) of the Slums Act and also that there is no need for acquisition of the entire land as proposed. Therefore on 21-10-1987 a letter has been addressed to the respondent by our counsel requesting to give another date for hearing and to furnish the required information. But after the 20th of october, 1987 we did not hear anything from the respondent. When we personally approached the office the staff were in form ing us that no orders were passed. B ut surprisingly only d uring second week of December, 1987 we came to know that a publication was made in the andhra Pradesh Gazette dated thursday, November 12, 1987 under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the slums Act declaring that in exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (2) of Section 3 of the A. P. Slum Improvement (Acquisition ofland) act, 1956 read with G. O. Ms. No. 45 housing dated 8th March, 1963 the commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad decided to acquire the said lands declared as slum area in pursuance of Section 3 (1) of the said act and that the lands shall on and from the beginning of the day on which the said notice is published in Andhra pradesh Gazette vest absolutely in the government of Andhra Pradesh free from all encumbrances. The said notification is shown as dated 24-10-1987". The appellant s counter, on the subject, has proceeded on the footing that there was clear information that the concerned area comprising the above compound was/is a source of danger to the public health and there being no provision for sanitation, it was/is also otherwise a slum and as respects enquiry, it is stated as follows:". . . on 6-10-1987, the advocate for the petitioners appeared before the commissioner and requested to furnish the names of the Officers who inspected the land along with copies of their inspection reports. The counsel for the petitioners also requested to inform whether the Director of Town Planning has been consulted in this case and requested for short adjournment. The case was finally pos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document