Failure to issue notices to interested parties under the Urban Land Act invalidates land surplus declaration, violating principles of natural justice.

1. The petitioner prays for an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of certiorari by calling for the records of the 2nd respondent pertaining to Proceedings No. 9(1) / 6(1) / 6331/76 dated 16-11-1981 and quash the said proceedings and for consequential directions.

2. The facts necessary leading to the filing of this writ petition may be briefly summarised:
One A. Venkateswara Rao on his behalf and on behalf of his son A. Koteswara Rao, filed a statement in Form - I under S.6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act'). The complete details of the lands held by Sri V. Venataswara Rao and his son A. Koteswara Rao were furnished in the said statement. The total extent of the land involved in the said statement is 6272 sq. mtrs., and according to the petitioner the entire land is occupied by the buildings which have been constructed much before the commencement of the Act i.e. 17-2-1976. The petitioner claims that it is not a vacant land. As an abundant caution only, a statement under S.6(1) of the Act, was filed before the 2nd respondent. After an elaborate enquiry, final orders under S.9 of the Act were passed on 14-5-1982 in C.C. No. 8(4) / 6(1) / 6332/6330/76 and C.C. No. 9/6(1)6238/6332/6330/76 dated 2-6-1982. The 2nd respondent herein declared that the said A. Venkatateshwara Rao does not hold any vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit. It was categorically held that extent of 6272 sq. metres with the buildings thereon is not a vacant land as defined under S.2(q)(ii) of the Act and is protected by the provisions of the Act. It is further stated that since the said land and other properties were the properties of joint Hindu family consisting of A. Venkateswara Rao and his son A. Koteswara Rao, there was a memorandum of partition between Venkateswara kao and his son Koteswara Rao and the entire urban property of 6272 sq. meters with building thereon in Sy. No.26/2(P) of Venkojipalem village was allotted to the share ef Sri A. Rao. The said Koteswara Rao entered into a partnership deed executed on 25-10-1986 to carry on business as real estate dealers and construction contractors under the name and style "M/s. L.S. and Company". The details of other partners are not televant for the purpose of this case.

3. However the said A. Venkateswara Rao retired from the partnership with effect from 1-4-1987, the remaining partners continued the said business in the same name of 'L. S. and Company' under the fresh deed of partnership dated 5-5-1987. The said land admeasuring 6272. sq, metres remained with the partnership firm of M/s. L.S. Company. With a view to utilise the land by building residential and commercial complex in accordance with the master plan, the petitioner herein applied for permission under S.22 of the Act on 26-12-1991.

4. While matter stood thus, the petitioner came to know about the order passed by the 2nd respondent herein 16-11-1981 declaring the very same land of an extent of 4773 sq. metres as an excess vacant land. The said order is passed in Proceedings No. 9(1) / 6(1) / 6331/76 on the basis of the statement purported to have been filed by the 4th respondent herein the petitioner submits that he came to know that a statement was filed by the 4th respondent on 15-9-1976 claiming himself to be the tenant of the entire extent of 6272 sq. metres of very same land. However, in the very same statement, the 4th respondent admitted that A. Koteswawa Rao S / o A. Venkateswara Rao to be the owner of the land. The petitioner states that the 4th respondent was permitted to occupy an extent of 284 sq. metres only as a licencee on a nominal payment of Rs. 150/-per month. It is asserted that no lease as such as granted by the owner A. Koteswara Rao or his father A. Venkateswara Rao to the 4th r