THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN

ORDER:

Mr. K. Laxmi Manohar, learned counsel appears for petitioner.

Mr. S.R. Vishnu Murthy, learned counsel appears for Mr. Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities, for respondent No.2.

Mr. M. Naga Raghu, learned counsel appears for respondent Nos.4 to 6.

2. In the instant Writ Petition, the petitioner assails the jurisdiction of the learned Lokayukta, respondent No.3, to entertain applications at the instance of the private respondents herein in respect of inter se disputes between the petitioner association and respondent Nos.4 to 6.

3. Proceedings dated 06.01.2023 and 18.01.2023 issued by respondent No.3 in Complaint No.28/2023/B1 were set aside by the learned Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.3575 of 2023 preferred by the same petitioner herein with the following directions and observations.

“4. It appears, as petitioner has not filed civil suit, even though liberty was granted, the respondents 4 to 6 filed O.S.No.1235 of 2022 in the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Medchal- Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, seeking declaration that they are the owners of the subject land, based on the sale deeds executed in their favour. It appears, they have also filed interlocutory applications praying to grant injunction, but the civil Court issued notices and the matter stands at the stage of consideration of injunction application. At that stage, complaint is filed before the Hon’ble Lokayukta by respondents 4 to 6 alleging that construction activity is taken up by the Municipal Corporation and if construction is undertaken by the Municipal Corporation, even before interlocutory application and the main suit are considered by the trial Court, grave prejudice would be caused to the complainant and that the Municipal Corporation should be restrained from undertaking development activity. Based on the said complaint, the order impugned herein is passed.

5. As noticed above and as can be seen from the pleadings, there is inter se dispute and now a civil suit is pending. When there is civil suit pending and there is inter se civil dispute between the Petitioner-Association and three individuals who claim title to the subject land based on the alleged sale deeds executed in their favour, merely because the Municipal Corporation was undertaking some development activity, the Hon’ble Lokayukta could not have exercised its jurisdiction to pass the orders impugned herein, more particularly when the Municipal Corporation is also a party before the civil Court. As the order passed by the Hon’ble Lokayukta is without jurisdiction, the same is set aside.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. However, it is made clear that we are not expressing any opinion on merits and it is open for the respondents 4 to 6 to prosecute their pending civil suit and injunction application and workout their remedies as available in law.”

4. Again, the private respondents approached the learned Lokayukta who, in Complaint No.28/2023/B1, passed order on

30.11.2024, the relevant portion of which reads as under:

“Therefore, the Municipal authorities ought to have rejected the case of Sri Venkateshwara Colony. Even if they want to develop a park for Sri Venkateshwara Colony, they could have taken the land of Sri Venkateshwara Colony and develop it. Even otherwise, if they want to develop this land, the Complainants have no objection for developing 200 Square Yards of land, which is earmarked in the approved layout.

Further, the Learned Standing Counsel, who appeared for Peerzadiguda Municipal Corporation was also not in a position to assert that the Municipality can develop a park in the area of one colony and name it as Sri Venkateshwara Colony, but the land taken for developing park belongs the adjacent colony i..e, Sri Sai Nagar Colony, which is not correct. Sri Venkateshwara Colony has no right saying t