1. Order of the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, Hyderabad, in proceedings No.B1/6012/76, dated 20.12.1992 passed under Section 8 (4) and Section 9 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for brevity ‘the Act’) is challenged in this writ petition, on the ground that the order was passed without following the mandatory procedure; and against a dead person, hence a nullity; and consequently to declare the orders passed under Section 10(1), 10(3), 10(5) and 10(6) of the Act, as illegal.

2. Petitioners are daughters of one Smt. Laxmi Bai. Smt. Laxmi Bai filed declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act before the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Land Ceiling, the 2nd respondent herein, declaring the lands in her possession measuring 24272 sq. meters situated in Sy.Nos.159/1, 159/2 part, 160, 161, and 162 of Guddimalkapur village, (presently Asifnagar Mandal), Hyderabad District. A provisional order under Section 8(1) of the Act together with a notice under Section 8(3) dated 4.06.1980 was served on the declarant, provisionally determining that she held 24,377.02 sq. meters in excess of the ceiling limit. The declarant filed her objection petition on 28.10.1980. Therein she indicated the names of the petitioners and others as being entitled for a separate unit each, on the ground that the lands were joint family properties acquired by her husband. Several other objections were also taken including that there were some structures on the land and the lands were agricultural lands, and hence cannot be treated as vacant land or urban land.

3. After filing the objections, the declarant died on 4.07.1991, leaving her four daughters including the three petitioners herein and one Smt. Yada Bai, a son, viz., Bansilal and two grandsons, viz., Dasaradh and Rajender through her deceased son as her legal representatives.

4. Though the declarant died on 4.07.1991, the proceedings were continued allegedly because the competent authority was not aware of the death. Thereupon a composite order was passed under Section 8 (4) and 9 of the Act on 20.10.1992. Nobody was heard in the matter. It was held that an extent of 2462.07 sq. meters of land was retainable area and an extent of 21805.28 sq. meters as excess. It is to be noted that admittedly this order was not served on the declarant; and in fact it could not have been served since she was already dead. The order was not even served on her legal representatives including the petitioners.

5. Thereupon notification under Section 10(1) was issued on 6.01.1993 and the same was published in the A.P. Gazette dated 20.01.1993 inviting objections. A draft declaration under Section 10(3) was issued as no objections were received and it was published in the A.P. Gazette dated 20.01.1994. A notice dated 4.04.1994 issued under Section 10(5) was sent to the declarant directing her to surrender the surplus land. The said notice was returned unserved on 25.11.1994 with an endorsement of the postal authority that the party expired. A revised notice was sent to Bansilal and others (not the petitioners) on 17.06.1994 on the basis of the information available in the declaration and it was acknowledged by Bansilal on 5.07.1994. Upon failure to surrender the land, notice under Section 10(6) was issued on 6.08.1994 authorizing the enquiry officer to take possession and possession was taken on 31.08.1994. In the above fact situation, the petitioners, who are the daughters of the deceased declarant, have filed this writ petition.

6. I have heard Sri A.K. Narasimha Rao representing Sri C. Rajendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

7. The impugned orders are challenged contending, –

(i) Order under Section 8(4) was passed against the dead person (declarant), hence the said order is null and void.

(ii) The petitioners acquired right over the property by