JUDGMENT:

This order will dispose of Writ Appeal No.152 of 2018 and Writ Petition No.40781 of 2016.

2. We have heard Mr. T.Srikanth Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing the appellants in W.A.No.152 of 2018 and the official respondents in W.P.No.40781 of 2016. Also heard Mr. Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner in W.A.No.152 of 2018 and the petitioner in W.P.No.40781 of 2016. We have heard Mr. K.Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) for respondent No.2 in W.A.No.152 of 2018 and respondent No.4 in W.P.No.40781 of 2016 and Mr. A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 24 in W.A.No.152 of 2018.

3. Writ Appeal No.152 of 2018 is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.10.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing Writ Petition No.17154 of 2011 filed by the 1st respondent as the writ petitioner.

4. 1st respondent as the writ petitioner had filed W.P.No.17154 of 2011 assailing the notification dated 28.05.2011 issued under Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Slum Improvement (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1956 (briefly referred to hereinafter as ‘the Slum Act’) declaring land admeasuring 2678 square meters with constructed buildings thereon in Survey No.216 corresponding to T.S.No.1 Block-L, Ward No.109, Circle-18 at Bansilalpet, Musheerabad Mandal, Bakaram Village in the district of Hyderabad (briefly referred to hereinafter as ‘the subject land’) as a slum area.

5. Before we advert to the notification dated 28.05.2011, we may mention that according to the 1st respondent, he is one of the co-owners of the subject land. There were 42 tenants in the constructed buildings. 1st respondent had initiated eviction proceedings against them under the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 and had obtained orders of eviction. Out of the 42 tenants, 4 were evicted by due process and 16 others had voluntarily vacated the premises. Remaining tenants had earlier instituted W.P.No.18951 of 2010 before this Court seeking a direction to the appellants for acquiring the subject land under the Slum Act for the purpose of allotting the same to them. W.P.No.18951 of 2010 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.04.2011 directing the District Collector of Hyderabad and GHMC to take a decision whether to acquire the subject land or not. It was thereafter that the impugned notification dated 28.05.2011 was issued and published in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, which 1st respondent says he came to know on 06.06.2011 when it was published in the newspapers. This came to be challenged in W.P.No.17154 of 2011. During pendency of the writ petition, appellants issued notice dated 31.10.2011 under Section 3(2) of the Slum Act. After calling for objections and hearing the same, Collector of Hyderabad District passed an order dated 31.10.2016 rejecting the objections raised by the petitioner and upholding the notice dated 31.10.2011 issued under Section 3(2) of the Slum Act. This came to be challenged in Writ Petition No.40781 of 2016.

6. Writ Petition No.17154 of 2011 was contested by the appellants by filing counter affidavit. Appellant No.3 in the counter affidavit stated that persons living in the subject land declared as ‘slum area’ belong to economically poorer section. Condition of the subject land was unhygienic, there being no civic amenities and proper sanitation facilities. Residents of the area were suffering from diarrhea and other diseases. Report was called for whereafter notification under Section 3(1) of the Slum Act was issued. GHMC also filed counter affidavit contending that impugned notification was issued in accordance with law.

7. Learned Single Judge considered the provisions of the Slum Act, more particularly Section 3 thereof and after comparing the said provisions with the Mysore Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1958 (briefly referred to hereinafter as ‘th